EOwN ARSENAL
BROWN UNIVERSITY
PROVIDENCE, R. 1.
BY
D. C. DRUCKER
#7,,
81 5 26 199
NCOTF.This formris to be executed t:, show propouIeq frl~ut -e ~ rid.I-i trip]ic--tP to the
C~h.ef c,' Ordronce for pror approvid of il t-iL!?c~pos,-U listribut~'r to -iencies
or individupis whose official inteyet in th r( ~ t~u f~ jtzt_fzfd by -x
planatory st-stertents on the back of tl~is for-'
COP!E S W ER W S4
REPORT hO AL 14o/lq.-14 TI1TLE: The -Efff-ct of Shear on the Fia-ztic Berndin,- of -,-arrns
T 0
oq.D'R-Artlller ____
Oi'-kwrnnition - -~
CoRyTP-Artillery r0ev.-
3IRITS-Smlnal Armns Dev.1 T_____
OPDTi'-TaflkAutomotive_________
ORDWU-Focket Dev.
ORDfTY-Executivf
1___________________ ____________
I
RDjTX-nkR -
ORMYEDEPARTMENT AGENCIES-
ORD -'Snkf or
Zzecutive Llbrary1
Arsenal____
iii-.-- - _______
-- --- ____
0a:Bp-8p1ngfield Armory________
1 ?KLS3-AberdfweflProv._Ground_______________
ORDJTR-Rarltafl Arsenal- 1______________
,Z-petroit Arsenal- -
APPROVING AUTHOR.ITY;
Date:
From:
EFFECT OF SHEAR ON THE PLASTIC B7,4PNG OF BEAMS rVt,
by -by
Ao D. C,/Drcker
has been studied in considerable detail but many questions remain unanswered.
action curve relating limiting values of shearing force and bending moment
for perfectly plastic beams, Simple illustrations demonstrate that, far more
than in the elastic range, such interaction is not just a local r.atter but
depends upon the geometry and loading of the entire beam. UsefuL interaction
curves are obtained, nevertheless, with the aid of the upper and lower bound
produces but a second order reduction in the limit moment of beams, a sm4
AA f
i/- q !I"
*The results presented in this paper i-ere obtained in the course 6oA earch
sponsored by the Office of Ordnance Research under Contract No, DA-19-02O-
ORD-3172, Project No. TB2-O001 (1086).
Introduction
elastic up to the yield point and then flows under constant stress. The
Onat and Prager (1) takes care of the situation. It might be expected
matter to determine whether or not the beam is fully plastic at the section.
V and M for fully plastic action would be most desirable for beams of
rectangular cross-section, for I-beams and for each shape in common use.
1Unfortunately such a curve does not really exist, even for any one shape,
because the geometry and loading of the entire beam. are important, not the
g an attempt will be made to clarify the reasons for the lack of a unique
interaction curve. Studies of the cantilever beam under end load have been
made by Homne (2), by Onat and Shield (3), by Green (U), 'nd by Xeth (5).
Much of the information to be presented here is contained, therefore, in
this previous work but the relevant parts of each have not :et been compared
in principle and some of the peculiarities of the results have not previously
been explained.
F! beams with constant shear force. The lower bound technique of limit
analysis (6) will be employed first to find a safe rhlation between V
and M and to provide reference values for the subsequent work, A local
criterion will then be sought to relate limit values of V and 14. The
The upper bound technique of limit analysis (6) will then be applied to
the simple span and comparison made with the lower bound and the local
It noted. The influence of the loading and the geometry away from the
be proposed.
stress which satisfy equilibrium and which do not violate the yield
limit load.
Figs. 1 and 2 show problems which are almost but not quite
equivalent, a cantilever beam under end load and a simple beam under
ax 8Y
ax aY
Contract DA-19-020-ORD-3172/7
Project No. TB2-O001 (1086)
If in Equation 2] is taken as identically zero, r is seen to be
at x-0
Sdy [3
parabolic '. Fig. 3a, satisfies equilibrium and will not violate yield
anywhere if the maximum bending stress does not exceed o and the shear
stress at the neutral axis is no more than a02. Calling the maximum
2
M4< abh/6
-0
S~[4]
S-0 V< aobh/3
To obtain an interaction plot, designate the known limit moment for moment
2
M =Cobh2/A
0
"0 2- "
stress ac>2.
The elastic solution then gives the lower bound jjinr action plot
M<2 V 2
Although most of the pclnts arc. far too low (too close to the origin) the
Contract DA-I9-020-ORD-3172/7
Project No. TB2-001 (M086)
2/3,0 2/3 point alone could be quite useful. Two other points which are
known are 021 and 1,0. As a yield or interaction curve must be conLvex
Therefore
(7) any line joining two lower bo'xld points must be a lower bound.
all points lying ins:.de the two inclined dashed straight linas of Fig.
a give
2 2
R + 2=02 [7)
:N - = ~sin h (! _
2'r1
-- = COS l
090 L h
and is valid for < as illustrated in Figs* 3b,c. For larger values
Contract ILA-19-020-ORD-3172/7
Project No, T12-0001 (1086)
-6-
V
V L (1 -Cos
L h
M =2(1)2(h)9h(1 -cos)
L- 2
Sfor h< ('r V_< 2
L-2 Vo -i"
For V 2
0
010
Mh D V
0
71
The composite result i3 plotted on Fig, 4 and should be a very good lower
F for by the lower bound solution. In a sense, therefore, the lower bounds
for Fig. 3a and for Figs. 3b, c, d, do not apply to exactly the same
relation for beams in bending to amalyze a very short length of beam between
Contract DA-19-020-ORD-3172/7
Project No. TB2-000o (3086)
two neighboring cross-sections. Shear, if included at all, is added by
supposing constancy along the length of the beam. Free end or support
e 'Vec , therefore, the assumption is made for general loading that each
its neighbor.
infonration can then be deduced about the state of stress and of strain
theory that, at the limit load, the stresses are constant and the deforma-
tion is purely plastic (6). Consider a small element of the beam which
with increment y Fig. 6a. As in the previous section, the normal stress
of yielding then requires that all shearing be in the >qr plane, &z = 0.
obeying the maximun shear rule the plastic and, therefore, total strain
s x +s y 0 or y Fx (1U]
Contract DA-19-020-ORD-3172/7
Project No. TB2-0001 (1086)
S~-8-
the origin, Fig. 6c. As the principal directions of stress and of strain
increment coincide,
tan 2E L = [12]
a 0
F0 2
xy 2 x
2+1
12"2
No. (1 or -P )O
MO 2&
1 d- /2v - -- 2e [14 -
V=V
V or VO- T- sinh
deformation pattern was assumed and the answer is the same as would be
found by following the upper bound procedure of equating the work done
except for Y 0.
taken as in Fig. 8 in which the outor regions of the beam stretch or contract
without shearing and the inner portion D shears and changes length. An
interaction curve can then be obtained for each value of D/h, Fig. 7. The
stage the inner region D is effectively under plastic shear alone and
00
V T bD
2 2
1 0bli a bD
or
2
110
the surfaces y = +h/2 are free of stress. Does this mean that one of
the individual interaction curves or their lower limiit is the true interac-
tion curve? The answer must be no because [15] is in fact below the
lower bounds, Figs. 3,4. The confusion arises because of the attempt to
Contract DA-19-020-ORD-3172/7
Project No. TB2-0001 (1086)
-10-
neighboring elastic (or rigid) reginns as will even more the peculiar
second order with V constant. The curvature varies linearly alo.ng the
beam and there is a gradual transition from the section of maximum mno t
to the section of zero moment. For elastic theory to have any validity,
the length of tha beam must ble several times the depth so that shear strains
6
xy resulting from the variation of y are rLot significant. At the
limit load, on the nther hand, the deformation is entirely plastic and
in the elastic beam becomes primary and has large energy dissipation
associated with it. The mis-match trouble for pure bending is avoided
by the plastic hinge, Fig. 10, which spreads out over a distance equal
local*
Contract DA-19-020-ORD-3172/7
Project No. TB2-0001 (1086)
In general, for both elastic and plastic members it is clear
section. Roots of notches, abrupt changes in depth, and fixed ends all
require more elaborate theory for accurate analysis. The influence of the
complete geometry and load distribution on the limit load appears in more
follows.
the cantilever problem of Fig, 1 wovid be solved, The limit load P would
V P PL
00 "0 bh
-bh aO-K
therefore
V h M [16]
Vo 2L 14o
and the ratio h/2L would give the proper point on the interaction curve.
lla. Although the hinge is of the standard type, its center is h/2
from the fixed ends The support is assumed capable of applying stresses
which keep-an elastic triangular core adjacent to the fixed end and so
Contract DA-19-020-OPD-3172/?
Project No. TB2-0001 (1086)
-12-
strengthen the beam. When the beam is very short, Green (4) and Onat and
Shield (3) propose the circular arc of sliding as in Fig. llb. The kinematic
picture proposed by Leth (5) for an I-beam is appropriate for the short
of view expressed in (3) (4) and (5) the length of the beam becomes question-
not resolve the inherent and important problem associated with a fixed end
picture is as,umed, Fig. 12a, equating work done by the forces P to the
energy dissipated in plastic deformation gives the upper bound result (6)
R This answer cannot be said to be unexpected but it is not obtained for the
Assuming a circular slip surface for verj short beams, Fig. 12b,
equating the work done by the external load to the internal dissipation
0 h _ h
J& PA 2 b 2 sin 2. 2 sin*
- [18]
L +- ctn
bound is desired. The result of Onat and Shield (3) is then found (V=P):
For vcry short beams and consequently small M/M0 , series expansion
Contract DA-19-020-ORD-3172/7
Project No. TB2-0001 (1086)
-13-
Fig* 7.
V 3 (M~ 2[20]
01
, PA SCO
-2 + aobb(h 4
bDL + -D)2 L
A
2 L 4 L
or
PL _4 LA R + / \2 [211
a bh 1 h h
Minimizing the upper bound by taking the derivative with respect to D/h
D= L or D+L -h [22]
__ interaction relation
valid for L/h < 1 or 1M/140 2(V/V 0 ) or V/V0 _ 1/2. Note that in
Equation [23] first order changes in V/V0 at V/V = 1 correspond
fcrr0 v/v 0
to first order changes in 1/0%. As shown in Fig. 7, the upper bound
Extension of the simple beam to the left and to the right of the
hinge picture like Fig. 12a or a circular arc of sliding as Fig. 12b.
However, comparing Fig. 12c and Fig. 13, it can easily be seen that
Contract DA-19-020-ORD-3172/7
Project No. TB2-0001 (1086)
-1)4-
Equation [21] does not contain a complete expression for the dissipated
energy for Fig. 13. The (1 - D/h)2 term must be doubled because bending
occurs at the loads P as well as at the center of the beam. Here again is
the mis-match trouble discussed earlier, Fig. 9b, and tVie reason Fig. 8 leads
energy dissipated,
D+ h [24]
2
L M V
andfor - <1 or "I0< 4 0
2h - M0 V0
M - [251
M0 (l0 V
a lower bcund and the lower bound corresponds to shear stress distributions
take
mation which nearly coincides with a lower bound and is not tou far from
possible upper bounds would seem satisfactory for practical and theoretical
Contract DA-19-020-ORD-3172/7
Project No. TB2-0001 (1086)
S~-15-
to solve problems, none will be solved. One of the main points is that the
interaction is not a local affair but depends upon the loading and geometry
of the entire beam. Nevertheless when all possible loadings are considered
ment of the central region of the simple beam will, of course, raise the
R limit loads still further above those discussed here in detail. All things
M _ 11 (27]
M
0
Contract DA-19-020-ORD-3172/7
Project No. TB2-0001 (1086)
N-16-
BIBLICGRAPHY
(1) E. T. Onat and W. Prager, "The Influence of Axial Forces on the Collapse
Load of Frames", Proceedings 1st Midwest Conference on Solid Mechanics,
University of Illinois, Urbana, 1953, ppa 40-42.
(2) M. R. Home: "The Plastic Theory of Bending of Mild Steel Beamis with
Particular Reference to the Effect of Shear Forces", Proc. Roy. Soc.
v. 207-A, 1951, p. 216.
(3) E. T. Onat and R. T. Shield: "The Influence of Shearing Forces on the
Plastic Bending of Wide Beams", Proceedings of the Second U. S.
National Congress of Applied Mechanics, University of Micigan, An
Arbor, June 14-18, 1954, pp. 535-537,
Contract DA-19-020-ORD-3172/7
Project No. TB2-O001 (1086)
DA-3172/7
P
-Fm
hit
L i_ _ _ _
4bkL
y
FIG. I CANTILEVER
P P
h x
y 12P
b K L -L ,.
F
FIG. 2 SIMPLE SPAN
(a)(c
L -------
(b) (d)
FIG. 3 EQUILIBRIUM DISTRIBUTIONS OF STRESS
DA-3172/7
11F
S ,see FIG. 3d
0.8-
o "FG.3b
SVo VO -see -3
0.4
30.2
01
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
M/M0
N ~to;,=o
(b)
0.4
0.0.--
0.4- -h - - - -
0.40.
3-h /'Z
- -- = A
-(a) (b)
Kh- FG 0
P Pp
I L
" I
_ II <2 *?2v h
L 2P L 12P 2P
D4Z
LL
CRITERION
0.6
0.4
0.2
DISTRIBUTION LIST
Number Aen
I0 Commanding Officer
Office of Ordnance Research
Box CM, Duke Station
Durham, North Carolina
2 Chief of Ordnance
Department of the Army
Washington 25, D. C.
Attn: ORDTB-PS
1 Director
Air University Library
Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama
1 Commanding General
Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland
Attn: Tech. Information Division
1 Commanding Officer
Picatinny Arsenal
Dover, New Jersey
1 Commanding General
Rock Island Arsenal
Rock Island, Illinois
4 Commandirg Officer
Watertown Arsenal
Watertown 72, Mass.
Attn: J. I. Bluhm
1 Commanding Officer
Engineering Res. & Dev. Laboratories
Fort Belvoir, Virginia
OOR-3172 - Distribution List, cont'd
Number Agency
2 Commanding General
Frankford Arsenal
Bridesburg Station
Philadelphia 37, Penna.
Attn: ORDBA-LC
1I Commander
U. S. Naval Proving Ground
SDahlgren, Virginia
S1 Director
National Bureau of Standards
Washington 25, D. C.
1 Corona Laboratories
National Bureau of Standards
Corona, California
1 Commanding General
Redstone Arsenal
Huntsville, Alabama
Attn: ORDJY-MR
1I Commanding General
Signal Corps Engineering Lab.
Fort Monmouth, New Jersey
Attn: Director of Research
1 The Director
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington 25, D. C.
Attn: Code 2021
OOR-3172 - Distribution List, cont'd
Number
2 Commanding Officer
Office of Naval Research
Branch Office
Navy, 100, FPO
New York, New York
1 Commanding General
Air Res. & Dev. Command
P. 0. Box 1395
Baltimore 3, Maryland
Attn: RDR
F Commanding General
X Air Res. & Dev. Command
P.O. Box 1395
Baltimore 3, Maryland
-Attn: RDTOIL, (Technical Library)
Number Agency
1 Chief of Ordnance
Department of the Airmy
Washington 25., D. C.
Attn: ORDGU-SE
For Transmittal to:
Canadian Joint Staff
2001 Connecticut Avenue, N. W.
washington 25, D. C.
Thru: ORDGU-SE
The Director
Snovjy, Ice & Pernafrost
Research Establishment
Corps of Engineers
1215 Washington Avenue
Wilmette, Illinois
1 Commanding General
-hite Sands Proving Ground
Las Cruces, New, Mexico
nittn: ORDBS-TS-TIB
2 Commanding General
Ordnance 'eapons Command
Rock Island, Illinois
Attn: Research Branch
OOR-3172 - Distribution List, cont'd
Number Agency
S1 Dr. C. W. Curtis
V Department of Physics
Lehigh University, Bethlehem, Pa.
1 Professor M. C. Steele
Department of' Applied Mechanics
University of Illinois
Urbana., Illinois