A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Residual stress, fatigue and stress relief



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 22nd 08, 09:17 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Peter Cole[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,572
Default Residual stress, fatigue and stress relief

"Metal Fatigue in Engineering", Ralph I. Stephens, Ali Fatemi, Robert R.
Stephens, Henry O. Fuchs, Ali Faterni
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0471...08#reader-link

Page 247-8 describe creation of beneficial residual stress at a notch by
overloading in tension, whereby the stress concentrating effect of the
notch brings the material above yield in the immediate notch vicinity,
followed by a residual compressive stress when the overload is relaxed.
The undesirable residual stresses created by bending to form parts (skin
tension caused by forming compression) are also mentioned.

Page 257 describes stress relieving via yielding.

Page 259 describes modifying residual stress by overloading:

"In springs, as in other parts that are primarily loaded in one
direction, an overload applied early in life is beneficial because it
introduces desirable residual compressive stresses at the proper
surface. Springs, hoists and pressure vessels are strengthened by proof
loading with a higher load than the expected service load"
Ads
  #2  
Old April 23rd 08, 03:30 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
jim beam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,758
Default Residual stress, fatigue and stress relief

Peter Cole wrote:
"Metal Fatigue in Engineering", Ralph I. Stephens, Ali Fatemi, Robert R.
Stephens, Henry O. Fuchs, Ali Faterni
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0471...08#reader-link


Page 247-8 describe creation of beneficial residual stress at a notch by
overloading in tension, whereby the stress concentrating effect of the
notch brings the material above yield in the immediate notch vicinity,
followed by a residual compressive stress when the overload is relaxed.
The undesirable residual stresses created by bending to form parts (skin
tension caused by forming compression) are also mentioned.

Page 257 describes stress relieving via yielding.

Page 259 describes modifying residual stress by overloading:

"In springs, as in other parts that are primarily loaded in one
direction, an overload applied early in life is beneficial because it
introduces desirable residual compressive stresses at the proper
surface. Springs, hoists and pressure vessels are strengthened by proof
loading with a higher load than the expected service load"


see previous post.

existence of residual stress does not mean it causes spoke fatigue.
simple observation shows the truth. spokes are not observed to have
their cracking initiate in regions of high residual stress, but in
regions of high applied stress. as one might expect given that spoke
elbows, by definition, are subject to bending as a function of being
offset from the spoke axis.

simple observation of the facts. i suggest you try educating people on
basic scientific method rather than leaping to conclusions. or trolling.

  #3  
Old April 23rd 08, 05:05 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Leo Lichtman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 767
Default Residual stress, fatigue and stress relief


"jim beam" wrote: existence of residual stress does not mean it causes
spoke fatigue.
simple observation shows the truth. spokes are not observed to have their
cracking initiate in regions of high residual stress, but in regions of
high applied stress. as one might expect given that spoke elbows, by
definition, are subject to bending as a function of being offset from the
spoke axis.

simple observation of the facts. i suggest you try educating people on
basic scientific method rather than leaping to conclusions. or trolling.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Residual COMPRESSIVE stress would tend to reduce fatigue failure, since
fatigue cracks grow ONLY under tensile stress. That observation does not
depart from the scientific method. leap to conclusions, and certainly is not
trolling. Under tension, spoke bends try to straighten out, which creates
tensile stress on the inside of the bend. Any residual compressive stress
in that area as a result of the formation of the bend would have the effect
that Peter Cole referred to.


  #4  
Old April 23rd 08, 05:15 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
jim beam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,758
Default Residual stress, fatigue and stress relief

Leo Lichtman wrote:
"jim beam" wrote: existence of residual stress does not mean it causes
spoke fatigue.
simple observation shows the truth. spokes are not observed to have their
cracking initiate in regions of high residual stress, but in regions of
high applied stress. as one might expect given that spoke elbows, by
definition, are subject to bending as a function of being offset from the
spoke axis.

simple observation of the facts. i suggest you try educating people on
basic scientific method rather than leaping to conclusions. or trolling.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Residual COMPRESSIVE stress would tend to reduce fatigue failure, since
fatigue cracks grow ONLY under tensile stress. That observation does not
depart from the scientific method. leap to conclusions, and certainly is not
trolling. Under tension, spoke bends try to straighten out, which creates
tensile stress on the inside of the bend. Any residual compressive stress
in that area as a result of the formation of the bend would have the effect
that Peter Cole referred to.



but the region of highest residual stress is near the neutral plane, not
the outer parts of the bend where fatigue is always observed to
initiate. and in fact, fatigue is still observed to initiate where, if
there is any, compressive residual is compressive, on the outer part of
the elbow.

again, observe the facts, bother to understand the whole story, and
don't leap to conclusions.
  #5  
Old April 23rd 08, 08:43 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Ben C
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,084
Default Residual stress, fatigue and stress relief

On 2008-04-23, Leo Lichtman wrote:

"jim beam" wrote: existence of residual stress does not mean it causes
spoke fatigue.
simple observation shows the truth. spokes are not observed to have their
cracking initiate in regions of high residual stress, but in regions of
high applied stress. as one might expect given that spoke elbows, by
definition, are subject to bending as a function of being offset from the
spoke axis.

simple observation of the facts. i suggest you try educating people on
basic scientific method rather than leaping to conclusions. or trolling.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Residual COMPRESSIVE stress would tend to reduce fatigue failure, since
fatigue cracks grow ONLY under tensile stress. That observation does not
depart from the scientific method. leap to conclusions, and certainly is not
trolling. Under tension, spoke bends try to straighten out, which creates
tensile stress on the inside of the bend. Any residual compressive stress
in that area as a result of the formation of the bend would have the effect
that Peter Cole referred to.


I think jim's point is that no-one has shown that spoke fatigue starts
on the inside of the bend significantly (or at all) more often than it
starts on the outside.

The evidence we would expect to see for residual stress being a factor
just isn't there.

Having said that many people (who aren't jim beam) don't scrutinize the
broken spoke carefully through a magnifying glass, but just chuck it in
the trash, so we wouldn't know.
  #6  
Old April 23rd 08, 12:57 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Peter Cole[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,572
Default Residual stress, fatigue and stress relief

Ben C wrote:

The evidence we would expect to see for residual stress being a factor
just isn't there.


The point I made by posting the source was that overloading was a
recognized technique to manipulate residual stress -- either to reduce
or increase it depending on the desired outcome.

If a spoke is laced with an elbow angle that is too large, there will be
a bending stress in operation (load stress) that will put the outside
skin in tension. If the angle is too small, the load stress will be
tension on the inside skin. If the load path for a spoke is straight
from the hub to the rim, there will be no moment (bending stress), only
uniform tension across the cross section and shear stress.

By overloading the spoke, any existing notch conditions (small cracks,
threads) yield in tension and after unloading have residual compressive
stress which retards crack growth (see reference). The important factor
is that the static load plus overload plus residual totals to greater
than yield, if only in very local spots where stresses become naturally
concentrated.

As for the claim that spokes always crack from the outside of the elbow
(which doesn't agree with my limited experience), it's a certainty that
cold forming a ~90 degree bend will leave micro cracks on the outside
skin. Stress relief will yield these and generate beneficial
(compressive) residual stress in the immediate vicinity (see reference).
It does not matter if the residual skin stress from forming was
compressive, the stress relief will mitigate the fatigue effect of
surface flaws and provide additional benefit. As Jobst has frequently
pointed out, these effects are at the microscopic level, the source I
cited explains the mechanism.

Stress relief by brief overload before a part is put into service is a
well established method for improving fatigue life. The only requirement
is that the overload be applied in the same direction as the service
load. The literature abounds with examples, I just cited one source.
This can only be controversial via willful ignorance.
  #7  
Old April 23rd 08, 01:58 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
jim beam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,758
Default Residual stress, fatigue and stress relief

Peter Cole wrote:
Ben C wrote:

The evidence we would expect to see for residual stress being a factor
just isn't there.


The point I made by posting the source was that overloading was a
recognized technique to manipulate residual stress -- either to reduce
or increase it depending on the desired outcome.

If a spoke is laced with an elbow angle that is too large, there will be
a bending stress in operation (load stress) that will put the outside
skin in tension. If the angle is too small, the load stress will be
tension on the inside skin. If the load path for a spoke is straight
from the hub to the rim, there will be no moment (bending stress), only
uniform tension across the cross section and shear stress.

By overloading the spoke, any existing notch conditions (small cracks,
threads) yield in tension and after unloading have residual compressive
stress which retards crack growth (see reference). The important factor
is that the static load plus overload plus residual totals to greater
than yield, if only in very local spots where stresses become naturally
concentrated.

As for the claim that spokes always crack from the outside of the elbow
(which doesn't agree with my limited experience), it's a certainty that
cold forming a ~90 degree bend will leave micro cracks on the outside
skin. Stress relief will yield these and generate beneficial
(compressive) residual stress in the immediate vicinity (see reference).
It does not matter if the residual skin stress from forming was
compressive, the stress relief will mitigate the fatigue effect of
surface flaws and provide additional benefit. As Jobst has frequently
pointed out, these effects are at the microscopic level, the source I
cited explains the mechanism.

Stress relief by brief overload before a part is put into service is a
well established method for improving fatigue life. The only requirement
is that the overload be applied in the same direction as the service
load. The literature abounds with examples, I just cited one source.
This can only be controversial via willful ignorance.


yet again, fatigue is NOT observed to be initiating in regions affected
by high residual stress, "relieved" or not. and it's independent of
whether any residual is either compressive or tensile. but it IS
observed to be originating in regions of high /applied/ stress. and
that high applied stress is entirely a function of the design of the
component.

if you want to fix spoke breakage, change the design - don't waste your
time clutching at straws demonstrating ignorance and inability to
observe. move to straight pull spokes. that's what the smart
manufacturers with research budgets and engineers that have done their
homework have done.
  #8  
Old April 23rd 08, 04:06 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Ben C
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,084
Default Residual stress, fatigue and stress relief

On 2008-04-23, Peter Cole wrote:
Ben C wrote:

The evidence we would expect to see for residual stress being a factor
just isn't there.


The point I made by posting the source was that overloading was a
recognized technique to manipulate residual stress -- either to reduce
or increase it depending on the desired outcome.


Interesting point and thank you for posting it. The idea of creating
residual compressive stress at a notch as you describe is not something
I've heard before.

If a spoke is laced with an elbow angle that is too large, there will be
a bending stress in operation (load stress) that will put the outside
skin in tension. If the angle is too small, the load stress will be
tension on the inside skin. If the load path for a spoke is straight
from the hub to the rim, there will be no moment (bending stress), only
uniform tension across the cross section and shear stress.

By overloading the spoke, any existing notch conditions (small cracks,
threads) yield in tension and after unloading have residual compressive
stress which retards crack growth (see reference). The important factor
is that the static load plus overload plus residual totals to greater
than yield, if only in very local spots where stresses become naturally
concentrated.

As for the claim that spokes always crack from the outside of the elbow
(which doesn't agree with my limited experience)


I don't know who's claiming that. My understanding was that if residual
stress were a factor, we would expect to see the majority of outbound
spoke failures starting from the inside and the majority of inbound
spokes failures starting from the outside.

Let me just check I got that the right way round... Yes I think so since
residual stress is tensile on the outside of the bend for a spoke whose
angle you made less acute (inbound), and the other way round for the
other ones.

The highest residual stresses I think jim beam has been saying are in
the interior of the spoke and not on the skin at all.

But, we don't see any particular pattern of whether failure starts on
the outside or inside, or on the exterior or in the interior, for
outbound or inbound spokes one way or the other.

But as I said we don't have much evidence that there isn't such a
pattern either, since most people don't look at their broken spokes in
such detail.

It's a pity Jobst didn't since he reports experiencing a big change in
number of broken spokes after he started stress-relieving. Examination
of the broken spokes might have helped confirm the theory that residual
stress was a significant factor in why they broke.

But I think you're saying with this new link that fatigue would be
mitigated at notches on either side of either kind of spoke anyway.

, it's a certainty that cold forming a ~90 degree bend will leave
micro cracks on the outside skin. Stress relief will yield these and
generate beneficial (compressive) residual stress in the immediate
vicinity (see reference). It does not matter if the residual skin
stress from forming was compressive, the stress relief will mitigate
the fatigue effect of surface flaws and provide additional benefit.

As Jobst has frequently
pointed out, these effects are at the microscopic level, the source I
cited explains the mechanism.


I don't remember Jobst mentioning anything about this mechanism of
notches resulting in compressive residual stress but never mind.

Stress relief by brief overload before a part is put into service is a
well established method for improving fatigue life. The only requirement
is that the overload be applied in the same direction as the service
load. The literature abounds with examples, I just cited one source.
This can only be controversial via willful ignorance.


The controversy here is not that brief overload relieves stress or that
stress relief improves fatigue life. It's the claim that this is known
to be _the significant beneficial effect_ of spoke-squeezing, the Mavic
method, and other "stabilization" practices that people do when
wheel-building.
  #9  
Old April 23rd 08, 08:02 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 225
Default Residual stress, fatigue and stress relief

On Apr 23, 7:57 am, Peter Cole wrote:
Ben C wrote:
The evidence we would expect to see for residual stress being a factor
just isn't there.


The point I made by posting the source was that overloading was a
recognized technique to manipulate residual stress -- either to reduce
or increase it depending on the desired outcome.

If a spoke is laced with an elbow angle that is too large, there will be
a bending stress in operation (load stress) that will put the outside
skin in tension. If the angle is too small, the load stress will be
tension on the inside skin. If the load path for a spoke is straight
from the hub to the rim, there will be no moment (bending stress), only
uniform tension across the cross section and shear stress.

By overloading the spoke, any existing notch conditions (small cracks,
threads) yield in tension and after unloading have residual compressive
stress which retards crack growth (see reference). The important factor
is that the static load plus overload plus residual totals to greater
than yield, if only in very local spots where stresses become naturally
concentrated.

As for the claim that spokes always crack from the outside of the elbow
(which doesn't agree with my limited experience), it's a certainty that
cold forming a ~90 degree bend will leave micro cracks on the outside
skin. Stress relief will yield these and generate beneficial
(compressive) residual stress in the immediate vicinity (see reference).
It does not matter if the residual skin stress from forming was
compressive, the stress relief will mitigate the fatigue effect of
surface flaws and provide additional benefit. As Jobst has frequently
pointed out, these effects are at the microscopic level, the source I
cited explains the mechanism.

Stress relief by brief overload before a part is put into service is a
well established method for improving fatigue life. The only requirement
is that the overload be applied in the same direction as the service
load. The literature abounds with examples, I just cited one source.
This can only be controversial via willful ignorance.


There are other requirements than direction of applied proof load,
namely ductility and defect size. For a large defect in a ductile
material, you will in fact get plasticity and residual compression
when you release the load. If the defect is very small, or the
material is brittle, proof loading may form a crack. There will be
some residual compression at the crack tip, but not enough to make the
part stronger than it was before it was cracked.
  #10  
Old April 23rd 08, 08:08 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 225
Default Residual stress, fatigue and stress relief

On Apr 23, 11:06 am, Ben C wrote:
On 2008-04-23, Peter Cole wrote:

Ben C wrote:


The evidence we would expect to see for residual stress being a factor
just isn't there.


The point I made by posting the source was that overloading was a
recognized technique to manipulate residual stress -- either to reduce
or increase it depending on the desired outcome.


Interesting point and thank you for posting it. The idea of creating
residual compressive stress at a notch as you describe is not something
I've heard before.



If a spoke is laced with an elbow angle that is too large, there will be
a bending stress in operation (load stress) that will put the outside
skin in tension. If the angle is too small, the load stress will be
tension on the inside skin. If the load path for a spoke is straight
from the hub to the rim, there will be no moment (bending stress), only
uniform tension across the cross section and shear stress.


By overloading the spoke, any existing notch conditions (small cracks,
threads) yield in tension and after unloading have residual compressive
stress which retards crack growth (see reference). The important factor
is that the static load plus overload plus residual totals to greater
than yield, if only in very local spots where stresses become naturally
concentrated.


As for the claim that spokes always crack from the outside of the elbow
(which doesn't agree with my limited experience)


I don't know who's claiming that. My understanding was that if residual
stress were a factor, we would expect to see the majority of outbound
spoke failures starting from the inside and the majority of inbound
spokes failures starting from the outside.

Let me just check I got that the right way round... Yes I think so since
residual stress is tensile on the outside of the bend for a spoke whose
angle you made less acute (inbound), and the other way round for the
other ones.

The highest residual stresses I think jim beam has been saying are in
the interior of the spoke and not on the skin at all.

But, we don't see any particular pattern of whether failure starts on
the outside or inside, or on the exterior or in the interior, for
outbound or inbound spokes one way or the other.


This is because residual compression on one side of the bend is
residual tension on the other, and trying to produce just the right
amount of residual stress in a spoke by hand is like aligning
microscope lenses with a framing hammer. It works great as long as
you never look into the eye piece.



But as I said we don't have much evidence that there isn't such a
pattern either, since most people don't look at their broken spokes in
such detail.

It's a pity Jobst didn't since he reports experiencing a big change in
number of broken spokes after he started stress-relieving. Examination
of the broken spokes might have helped confirm the theory that residual
stress was a significant factor in why they broke.

But I think you're saying with this new link that fatigue would be
mitigated at notches on either side of either kind of spoke anyway.

, it's a certainty that cold forming a ~90 degree bend will leave
micro cracks on the outside skin. Stress relief will yield these and
generate beneficial (compressive) residual stress in the immediate
vicinity (see reference). It does not matter if the residual skin
stress from forming was compressive, the stress relief will mitigate
the fatigue effect of surface flaws and provide additional benefit.


As Jobst has frequently
pointed out, these effects are at the microscopic level, the source I
cited explains the mechanism.


I don't remember Jobst mentioning anything about this mechanism of
notches resulting in compressive residual stress but never mind.

Stress relief by brief overload before a part is put into service is a
well established method for improving fatigue life. The only requirement
is that the overload be applied in the same direction as the service
load. The literature abounds with examples, I just cited one source.
This can only be controversial via willful ignorance.


The controversy here is not that brief overload relieves stress or that
stress relief improves fatigue life. It's the claim that this is known
to be _the significant beneficial effect_ of spoke-squeezing, the Mavic
method, and other "stabilization" practices that people do when
wheel-building.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Your best solution to relieving residual stress! liverliver Techniques 2 December 28th 07 06:48 PM
yet another residual stress redux jim beam Techniques 0 March 17th 07 10:41 PM
Spoke stress relief test [email protected] Techniques 32 December 27th 06 07:21 PM
Stress-relief demonstration suggestions? [email protected] Techniques 73 January 8th 05 03:09 AM
RR: Stress relief Mike Kennedy Mountain Biking 3 October 5th 04 06:59 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.