Stress resolution

An element's stress state is essentially three-dimensional, generally with both normal

and shear components in each of the three dimensions. The components are usually
deduced by superposition of load building blocks as in the stress example of the
previous section. The two- and one-
dimensional cases illustrated here are
particularisations of what is essentially
three-dimensional.
The element may be rotated about all
three axes into a unique principal
orientation in which all shear stresses
vanish. The corresponding normal
stresses in this principal orientation are
termed the principal stresses. A stress
state is characterised most succintly by the
principal stresses, say (
1
,
2
,
3
), and failure theories - the next step in failure
assessment - are expressed in terms of principal stresses. It is therefore necessary to
examine how principal stresses are derived from Cartesian components.
Stress is a tensor entity, so complex tensor arithmetic must be applied in the three-
dimensional case to evaluate stress components as the element rotates. We consider
here only the simpler two dimensional case in which one direction is known to be
principal, and resolution consists of element rotation only about that principal axis.
Thus in the 2-dimensional sketch above, the z-axis is principal and x-y stress
components vary as the element rotates about that axis. Fortunately the great majority
of practical cases are two -dimensional since the relatively simple
loading in conjunction with the natural choice of axes leads to
one of the axes being principal automatically. For example there
can be no stress on the free surface of a body, so the surface
normal is an obvious choice for one of the three Cartesian axes -
as there can be no shear on this surface, the axis is automatically a principal axis.
Although we consider only "two-dimensional stresses", it is important to remember
always that stress states are essentially three dimensional.
In this course the positive convention adopted for the orientation of a plane
(characterised by its normal) is shown at (a) below, and for normal and shear stress and
strain at (b) - positive shear is counter-clockwise. The two sketches (c) illustrate the
consistency of the positive senses for shear stresses and strains; the total shear strain
(distortion) is = 2( /2).
Page 1 of 5 DANotes: Stress etc: Resolution
8/22/2008 http://www.mech.uwa.edu.au/DANotes/SSS/resolution/resolution.html
Using these conventions, the plane stress state at 'A' in the example of the previous
section is :

x
= -93,
y
= 0,
xy
= +34, (
yx
= -34) MPa
We now examine the variation of normal and shear stress components as the
inclination of the face on which they occur changes.
Consider the elemental unit cube ( size 1x1x1 ) under the known positive 2-dimensional
stress components shown in ( i) below - the third dimension (z) is principal.
Rotational equilibrium requires complementary shear, that is
yx
must equal -
xy
.
This necessity has been incorporated into ( ii), from which it is apparent that the three
components (
x
,
y
,
xy
) together with the third principal are necessary to define the
stress state. The three components are called the Cartesian triad.
We wish to evaluate - in terms of the Cartesian triad - the stress components ( , ) in
the general direction , so we consider force equilibrium of the wedge element ( iii),
one of whose faces is inclined at . The height of the wedge remains 1 unit, however the
dimension in the x-sense becomes 1.tan, and the length of the hypotenuse is 1.sec.
The force components on each face of the wedge are the stress components multiplied
by the face area - these are shown in ( iv). For force equilibrium of the wedge :
in the -sense :- .sec - (
x
+
xy
.tan ) cos - (
y
.tan +
xy
) sin = 0
in the -sense :- .sec + (
x
+
xy
.tan ) sin - (
y
.tan +
xy
) cos = 0
which on simplification give the required resolution equations :-
=
1
/
2
(
x
+
y
) +
1
/
2
(
x
-
y
) cos 2 +
xy
sin 2
= -
1
/
2
(
x
-
y
) sin 2 +
xy
cos 2
Similar equations but with different signs are encountered in the literature - sign
differences arise from positive conventions other than the above.


Page 2 of 5 DANotes: Stress etc: Resolution
8/22/2008 http://www.mech.uwa.edu.au/DANotes/SSS/resolution/resolution.html
The simultaneous occurence of sine and cosine terms in these equations makes it
difficult to visualise how the resolved components ( , ) vary as the direction
changes. More easily interpreted equations result if the stress state is defined by the
basic triad (
m
,
a
,
p
) rather than by the Cartesian triad.
p
is the inclination of the
plane of the maximum principal stress with respect to the x-reference.
The basic triad is related formally to the Cartesian as follows :-
( 3a)
m
=
1
/
2
(
x
+
y
)

a
cos 2
p
=
1
/
2
(
x
-
y
) that is
a
= [ {
1
/
2
(
x
-
y
) }
2
+
xy
2
]

a
sin 2
p
=
xy

p
=
1
/
2
arctan [ 2
xy
/(
x
-
y
) ]
. . . . though these equations seldom need to be implemented.
Making these substitutions leads to resolution equations in the more meaningful
form :-
( 4a) =
m
+
a
cos 2 (
p
- ) { nomenclature explanation }
=
a
sin 2 (
p
- )
It is apparent that normal and shear stress components vary sinusoidally with direction
(not unlike vector components) however the variation is second harmonic - that is
stress components are the same along axes which lie at 180
o
to one another. The two
sinusoids are of the same amplitude
a
and out of phase by 45
o
.

m
is the constant component of the normal stress.
The principal and maximum shear stresses follow immediately as :-
( 5)
max
=
m
+
a
( at
p
)

min
=
m
-
a
( at
p
- /2 )

max
=
a
( at
p
- /4 )
These relations are often expressed graphically via Mohr's
stress circle, in which
m
and
a
represent the circle's centre
location and radius respectively. The conventions require
that angles on the circle, reckoned from the X-radius, are
double the corresponding angles on the element (which are
measured from the x-reference), and in the opposite sense.
The reader should confirm that this construction satisfies
equation ( 4a).

This example demonstrates typical stress resolution using the simple trigonometry of
Mohr's circle rather than the formal resolution equations derived above. The example
also shows clearly the variation of stress components with orientation, , as predicetd
by ( 4a).
Page 3 of 5 DANotes: Stress etc: Resolution
8/22/2008 http://www.mech.uwa.edu.au/DANotes/SSS/resolution/resolution.html
This script resolves the Cartesian components of a two-dimensional stress state into
the principal components.

It is important to remember that a stress-strain state is always essentially
three- dimensional, involving three principals. We have addressed only
resolution in two dimensions to obtain a single Mohr's circle involving the principals in
these two dimensions - however two other circles must exist relating these two
principals with the third.
As noted above the third (eg. automatic) principal is usually deduced from the nature of
the problem. Two common situations arise when the state is either one of :
plane stress :
If there is no stress orthogonal to the 1-2 resolution plane then
3
= 0
plane strain :
If there is no strain orthogonal to the 1-2 resolution plane then
3
= 0 and it
follows from ( 2) that
3
= (
1
+
2
)
Fig F completes the Mohr's circles for
the example above (Fig D) assuming that
the element is loaded in plane stress,
that is the three principals are ( -600, -
100, 0 ) MPa.
Fig G illustrates the three principals and
three Mohr's circles for a completely
unrelated stress state where two-
dimensional resolution happens to relate to the largest (3-2) circle and
1
is the
principal stress orthogonal to the resolution plane.
The outcome of stress resolution at an element must be a set of three principals - all
three must be known before the element's safety can finally be assessed by application
of an appropriate failure theory.

Strain resolution
Resolution of strain is generally unnecessary when assessing the safety of common
engineering components, however the following description is given for completeness.
If a material behaves in a linear elastic manner then the directions of principal strains
are identical to the directions of principal stresses, and all the preceding equations, and
Mohr's circles, may be expressed in strain terms - provided that everywhere in the
stress equations :
normal stress, , is replaced by normal strain, , and
shear stress, , is replaced by half the shear strain, ie. by /2.
Page 4 of 5 DANotes: Stress etc: Resolution
8/22/2008 http://www.mech.uwa.edu.au/DANotes/SSS/resolution/resolution.html
The strain analogues of the foregoing are therefore :-
( 3b)
m
=
1
/
2
(
x
+
y
) ;
a
=
1
/
2
[ (
x
-
y
)
2
+
xy
2
]
1/2
;
p
=
1
/
2
arctan [
xy
/
(
x
-
y
) ]
( 4b) =
m
+
a
cos 2 (
p
- ) ; /2 =
a
sin 2 (
p
- )
Experimentally, surface stresses are found from strain gauges attached to accessible
surfaces. It is useful therefore to be able to quickly interrelate stresses and strains for a
plane stress state, for which, since the principal stress and strain directions coincide, it
follows from ( 2) and ( 3) that :-
( 6) E
m
= ( 1 - )
m
; E
a
= ( 1 + )
a

which relate the centres and radii of the two circles. If these circles are drawn to scale,
and it is required that their circumferences coincide for ease of drawing, then it may be
shown that :
( 7) E $

= ( 1 + ) $

; ( 1 + ) C

= ( 1 - ) C

where
Although the use of scaled Mohr's circles is not necessarily advocated, it is strongly
recommended that the circles are at least sketched free-hand as an aid to interpretation
of the equations. It is important that skill is developed in visualising the interplay
between components and principals.
The following example demonstrates application of strain-to-stress transformation.

This example demonstrates application of strain-to-stress transformation.

Having established the stress state at a point in a component by evaluating the three
principals, we are now in a position to apply a failure theory which correlates this
state with the static strength(s) of the material and predicts the degree of safety at the
point in question.
| Notes contents | chapter index | previous | top of page | next |
Copyright 1999-2005 Douglas Wright, doug@mech.uwa.edu.au
last updated May 2005

$

is the scale of the strain circle ( strain units/mm )

$

is the scale of the stress circle ( MPa/mm )
C

is the distance (mm) of the strain circle centre from the shear axis

C

is the distance (mm) of the stress circle centre from the shear axis
Page 5 of 5 DANotes: Stress etc: Resolution
8/22/2008 http://www.mech.uwa.edu.au/DANotes/SSS/resolution/resolution.html