YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASME
    • Journal of Applied Mechanics
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASME
    • Journal of Applied Mechanics
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Tresca Versus Von Mises: Which Failure Criterion is More Conservative in a Probabilistic Context?

    Source: Journal of Applied Mechanics:;2024:;volume( 091 ):;issue: 011::page 111008-1
    Author:
    Cunha, Americo, Jr.
    ,
    Yanik, Yasar
    ,
    Olivieri, Carlo
    ,
    da Silva, Samuel
    DOI: 10.1115/1.4063894
    Publisher: The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
    Abstract: This tutorial examines the failure theories of Tresca and von Mises, both of which are crucial for designing metallic structures. Conventionally, Tresca is regarded as more conservative than von Mises from a deterministic perspective. This tutorial, however, introduces a different viewpoint, presenting a scenario where von Mises’ theory may appear more conservative when variability in the mechanical system parameters is considered. This often-overlooked aspect is not extensively addressed in standard textbooks on solid mechanics and the strength of materials. The tutorial aims to shed light on the non-negligible probability where von Mises’ criterion yields a smaller equivalent stress than Tresca, thus being more conservative. It underscores the importance of integrating probabilistic considerations into stress analyses of solids, offering valuable insights for the education of structural mechanics.
    • Download: (640.2Kb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Tresca Versus Von Mises: Which Failure Criterion is More Conservative in a Probabilistic Context?

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4303135
    Collections
    • Journal of Applied Mechanics

    Show full item record

    contributor authorCunha, Americo, Jr.
    contributor authorYanik, Yasar
    contributor authorOlivieri, Carlo
    contributor authorda Silva, Samuel
    date accessioned2024-12-24T19:00:37Z
    date available2024-12-24T19:00:37Z
    date copyright8/28/2024 12:00:00 AM
    date issued2024
    identifier issn0021-8936
    identifier otherjam_91_11_111008.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4303135
    description abstractThis tutorial examines the failure theories of Tresca and von Mises, both of which are crucial for designing metallic structures. Conventionally, Tresca is regarded as more conservative than von Mises from a deterministic perspective. This tutorial, however, introduces a different viewpoint, presenting a scenario where von Mises’ theory may appear more conservative when variability in the mechanical system parameters is considered. This often-overlooked aspect is not extensively addressed in standard textbooks on solid mechanics and the strength of materials. The tutorial aims to shed light on the non-negligible probability where von Mises’ criterion yields a smaller equivalent stress than Tresca, thus being more conservative. It underscores the importance of integrating probabilistic considerations into stress analyses of solids, offering valuable insights for the education of structural mechanics.
    publisherThe American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
    titleTresca Versus Von Mises: Which Failure Criterion is More Conservative in a Probabilistic Context?
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume91
    journal issue11
    journal titleJournal of Applied Mechanics
    identifier doi10.1115/1.4063894
    journal fristpage111008-1
    journal lastpage111008-6
    page6
    treeJournal of Applied Mechanics:;2024:;volume( 091 ):;issue: 011
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian