Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Pure bending

Pure bending refers to a state of deformation in prismatic beams subjected to equal and opposite couples applied in the same longitudinal plane, resulting in a constant and the absence of transverse shear forces. Under this loading, the beam assumes a uniform , bending into an of a circle with a large radius compared to its cross-sectional dimensions, while plane cross-sections remain plane and perpendicular to the longitudinal axis. A key feature is the , which passes through the of the cross-section and experiences zero normal stress and strain, with tensile stresses developing on one side and compressive stresses on the other, varying linearly with distance from the . The normal stress distribution is given by the formula \sigma = -\frac{My}{I}, where M is the , y is the perpendicular distance from the , and I is the of the cross-section. This idealized condition, though rarely encountered exactly in practice, forms the basis for analyzing stresses in beams and is derived from assumptions including linear elastic material behavior and small deformations.

Fundamentals

Definition and Conditions

Pure bending is a specific loading condition in beam theory where a segment of a beam experiences a constant along its length accompanied by zero , resulting in uniform without transverse deformation. This idealized state simplifies the analysis of flexural behavior by focusing solely on the effects of the applied moment. For pure bending to occur, the beam must be prismatic, meaning it is initially with a constant cross-section throughout the segment of interest, and the loading must generate equal and opposite couples that produce a uniform moment distribution. A common experimental setup achieving this is the four-point bending test, where two outer supports and two inner loading points create a region of constant moment and zero shear between the inner points. Additionally, transverse shear effects must be negligible, which is typically valid for slender beams where the length-to-depth ratio is sufficiently large. This configuration of pure bending is essential in for isolating pure flexural responses, enabling precise theoretical and experimental studies of material behavior under without complications from influences. In such cases, the deforms into an of a circle with uniform .

Distinction from General Bending

In theory, general refers to the deformation of a structural member subjected to both transverse forces and bending moments that may vary along its length, resulting in non-uniform and a combination of normal and stresses throughout the cross-section. This scenario is common in real-world applications, such as simply supported beams under distributed loads, where the influences the overall stress distribution and deflection profile. Pure bending, by contrast, occurs under the specific conditions of zero shear force and a constant bending moment, leading to uniform curvature and a purely uniaxial stress state dominated by normal stresses alone. In general bending, the presence of shear deformation and moment variation complicates the analysis, as shear stresses must be superimposed on normal stresses, requiring consideration of higher-order effects like those in Timoshenko beam theory. The implications for are significant: pure allows for simplified, exact analytical solutions based on Euler-Bernoulli assumptions, facilitating straightforward computation of stresses and strains in regions of constant , such as the central of a four-point bend test. General , however, often necessitates numerical methods, finite , or superposition of and flexural effects to accurately predict , especially in beams with significant contributions or complex loading.

Kinematics

Deformation Geometry

In pure bending, a prismatic with an initially straight longitudinal and symmetric cross-section deforms under equal and opposite end moments that produce no along its length. This results in a uniform , transforming the beam's into a with a constant \rho. The deformed shape assumes that the beam segment bends into part of a circle centered at a point offset from the , maintaining the prismatic nature of the cross-sections while altering their orientation. The key geometric feature of this deformation is the rotation of cross-sections, where originally plane sections perpendicular to the beam's axis remain plane and rotate to stay perpendicular to the deformed neutral axis. This rotation occurs without distortion of the cross-sectional shape, preserving the beam's transverse dimensions while the longitudinal fibers adjust their lengths relative to the curvature. The neutral axis, defined as the original centerline passing through the of the cross-section, undergoes no net extension or contraction and serves as the reference for the circular path with radius \rho. Fibers located above the shorten (compress) due to the , while those below lengthen (extend) symmetrically to the same degree, creating a mirrored deformation about the . This symmetric fiber behavior ensures that the remains the locus of zero longitudinal deformation, with the extent of compression and extension varying linearly with distance from this axis in the deformed configuration. The overall geometry thus describes a smooth, arc-like without transverse effects, characteristic of pure bending conditions.

Longitudinal Strain Distribution

In pure bending, the longitudinal strain distribution across the beam's cross-section is linear and varies with the distance from the , arising directly from the geometric deformation of the beam under . This strain field is purely kinematic, determined by the change in length of longitudinal fibers as the beam bends into an arc. The , located at the of the cross-section, experiences zero strain, serving as the reference for measuring deformations in fibers above and below it. The kinematic relation for the normal longitudinal \epsilon_x at a y from the is given by \epsilon_x = -\frac{y}{\rho}, where \rho is the of the neutral axis. This equation quantifies the as the relative elongation or shortening of fibers, with the linear variation ensuring that increases proportionally from zero at the to maximum values at the extreme fibers of the beam height. The derivation stems from the geometry of deformation, assuming plane sections remain plane and perpendicular to the longitudinal axis after . Consider a small segment of the subtending an \Delta \phi at the center of . The undeformed of a at y from the is \Delta s = \rho \Delta \phi. After deformation, this fiber follows an of \rho - y, yielding a deformed length \Delta s' = (\rho - y) \Delta \phi. The longitudinal strain is then the limit of the relative length change: \epsilon_x = \lim_{\Delta s \to 0} \frac{\Delta s' - \Delta s}{\Delta s} = \frac{(\rho - y) \Delta \phi - \rho \Delta \phi}{\rho \Delta \phi} = -\frac{y}{\rho}. This geometric approach confirms the linear strain profile, with no strain alteration along the neutral axis where y = 0. The sign convention in the relation \epsilon_x = -y / \rho follows standard beam theory, where y is positive upward from the neutral axis and \rho > 0 for concave-upward curvature (positive bending). Thus, fibers above the neutral axis (y > 0) experience compressive strain (\epsilon_x < 0), while those below (y < 0) undergo tensile strain (\epsilon_x > 0). This distribution holds symmetrically for the opposite curvature when \rho < 0.

Assumptions

Core Assumptions

The theory of pure bending relies on several foundational assumptions that simplify the analysis of beam deformation under constant bending moment. These assumptions enable the derivation of key relationships between applied moments, internal stresses, and strains, while neglecting complexities such as shear effects and material nonlinearities. A primary assumption is that the beam is initially straight, possesses a constant cross-section along its length, and is composed of a homogeneous material with isotropic properties. This ensures uniformity in the beam's geometry and material response, allowing for consistent stress and strain distributions without variations due to initial imperfections or non-uniformity. The homogeneity implies that the material's elastic properties, such as Young's modulus, are the same throughout the beam, facilitating the application of linear elasticity principles. Central to the theory is the Bernoulli-Euler hypothesis, which posits that plane cross-sections perpendicular to the longitudinal axis before deformation remain plane and normal to the deformed axis after bending. This kinematic assumption implies that deformation occurs primarily through rotation of cross-sections without distortion in their plane, leading to a linear distribution of longitudinal strains across the section height. It underpins the neglect of shear deformation, assuming that transverse shear strains are negligible compared to bending strains, particularly in slender beams. The material is further assumed to behave linearly elastically, obeying within the elastic limit, with transverse strains being negligible and no significant shear deformation contributing to the overall response. This allows stresses to be directly proportional to strains via the material's modulus of elasticity, simplifying the stress analysis to uniaxial conditions along the beam length. is considered identical in tension and compression, ensuring symmetric material response. Finally, pure bending is characterized by deformation occurring in a single plane, with the bending moment remaining constant along the beam segment and transverse shear forces being zero. This condition isolates the effects of moment-induced curvature, excluding influences from varying loads or shear that could alter the stress state. The radius of curvature is assumed large relative to the cross-sectional dimensions, reinforcing the applicability to gentle curvatures.

Limitations and Validity

The pure bending theory, grounded in the Euler-Bernoulli beam framework, applies primarily to slender beams where the length significantly exceeds the cross-sectional depth (typically L/h > 10), ensuring negligible transverse effects relative to bending. It is valid under conditions of small deformations, where strains remain infinitesimal and rotations are minimal, aligning with principles, and for homogeneous, elastic materials operating below the yield stress to maintain proportionality. Key limitations emerge when these conditions are not met. In short beams or those with deep sections, transverse shear deformations become significant, rendering the assumption of plane sections remaining perpendicular to the longitudinal axis invalid and requiring alternative models like Timoshenko theory for accuracy. Plastic deformation or large strains beyond the elastic limit violate the theory's linear stress-strain relationship, as the material response deviates from elasticity. Additionally, in composite or non-homogeneous materials with varying moduli across the cross-section, the shifts away from the geometric , complicating the uniform strain distribution assumption and leading to erroneous stress calculations. Violating these validity boundaries results in practical consequences, such as overestimation of stiffness due to ignored contributions, which underpredicts actual deflections and can mislead assessments. Inaccurate predictions from mislocated axes or nonlinear heighten risks, potentially causing premature yielding or in applications like structural components or elements. These issues underscore the need to verify applicability through slenderness ratios and material properties before relying on pure bending .

Stress and Strength Analysis

Normal Stress Derivation

In pure bending, the normal stress distribution arises from the kinematic strain field through the material's constitutive response and equilibrium considerations. The longitudinal ε_x varies linearly with the distance y from the , given by ε_x = -y / ρ, where ρ is the of the bent . Under the assumption of linear elastic material behavior, relates and as σ_x = E ε_x, where E is the . Substituting the strain expression yields the normal σ_x = -E y / ρ. This indicates a linear variation of normal across the cross-section, with tensile (positive σ_x) below the for positive and (negative σ_x) above it, reaching zero at the (y = 0) and achieving maximum magnitude at the outermost fibers. To ensure equilibrium, the internal bending moment M must be balanced by the moment resultant of the stress distribution over the cross-section. This balance is expressed as M = - ∫ σ_x y , dA, integrated across the entire area A of the beam's cross-section. Substituting the derived stress gives M = - ∫ (-E y / ρ) y , dA = (E / ρ) ∫ y^2 , dA, confirming that the linear stress profile sustains the applied moment without net axial force, as the stresses are antisymmetric about the neutral axis.

Flexural Formula

The flexural formula provides the relationship between the normal in a under pure bending, the applied , and the geometric properties of the 's cross-section. It is expressed as \sigma_x = -\frac{M y}{I}, where \sigma_x is the normal at a point in the cross-section, M is the internal , y is the perpendicular distance from the to the point, and I is the second moment of area () of the cross-section about the . This formula arises from the Euler-Bernoulli beam theory and assumes linear elastic behavior, with the distribution being linear across the cross-section and zero at the . To derive the flexural formula, start from the kinematic relation for longitudinal strain in pure bending, \epsilon_x = -y / \rho, where \rho is the of the deformed beam axis. Applying for uniaxial stress, \sigma_x = E \epsilon_x = -E y / \rho, where E is the . The relationship between the and is given by the Euler-Bernoulli , M = E I / \rho. Eliminating \rho from these equations yields \sigma_x = -M y / I, completing the derivation and linking the stress directly to the moment without explicit reference to . For practical analysis, the maximum normal stress \sigma_{\max} occurs at the outermost , where y = y_{\max} (the distance from the to the farthest point in the cross-section). This leads to \sigma_{\max} = M / Z, with the defined as Z = I / y_{\max}. In symmetric cross-sections, such as rectangular or circular beams, the passes through the , ensuring balanced tensile and compressive stresses. The Z thus serves as a key geometric parameter for assessing the capacity of a section under a given .

Applications

Design Implications

In beam design, pure bending guides the selection of cross-sections to ensure structural integrity under applied s. For strength considerations, engineers verify that the maximum normal does not exceed the allowable by applying the flexural formula, where the peak occurs at the extreme fibers: σ_max = M y_max / I ≤ σ_allow. Here, M is the maximum , y_max is the distance from the to the outermost fiber, I is the , and σ_allow is typically derived from the material's strength F_y divided by a (FS), such as σ_allow = F_y / FS for general materials or 0.66 F_y for compact sections under allowable (ASD). This approach allows designers to choose sections with sufficient S = I / y_max to resist the , prioritizing to yielding or at critical locations like midspan in simply supported beams. Stiffness requirements in pure bending focus on limiting deflections to maintain serviceability, using the moment-curvature to relate applied moments to deformation. The is given by 1/ρ = M / (E I), where ρ is the and E is the of elasticity; this informs deflection calculations, ensuring maximum deflection δ_max does not exceed limits like L/360 for floors (L being the span length). Designers select sections with adequate E I to control excessive sagging or , particularly in long-span applications where user comfort or functional clearances are concerns. Design factors incorporate load amplification and material properties to account for uncertainties, enhancing safety in pure bending applications. Load factors, such as 1.7 for dead plus live loads in plastic design or 1.3 when including or seismic effects, scale service loads to ultimate conditions for strength checks. allowables vary by ; for , compact sections permit higher utilization (e.g., 0.66 F_y) compared to noncompact ones (down to 0.60 F_y), while factors like unbraced length L_b influence lateral torsional reductions. The pure bending approximation suffices in regions of constant and negligible (V ≈ 0), such as central spans in four-point loaded beams or long-span members where stresses are small relative to bending stresses (order h/L, with h as depth and L as ). This simplifies analysis for prismatic beams under symmetric loading, but requires validation against -dominated cases near supports.

Illustrative Examples

To demonstrate the application of pure bending analysis, consider a rectangular subjected to a constant of M = 10 kNm. The has a width b = 50 mm ($0.05 m) and height h = 100 mm ($0.1 m). The I about the is calculated as I = \frac{b h^3}{12} = \frac{0.05 \times (0.1)^3}{12} = 4.167 \times 10^{-6} \, \mathrm{m}^4. The maximum distance from the is y_{\max} = h/2 = 0.05 m. The maximum normal \sigma_{\max} is then given by the flexural \sigma_{\max} = \frac{M y_{\max}}{I} = \frac{10 \times 10^3 \times 0.05}{4.167 \times 10^{-6}} = 120 \, \mathrm{MPa}. This occurs at the outer fibers of the . In a second example, determine the required section modulus Z for a steel beam to support a bending moment of M = 50 kNm without yielding. The steel has a modulus of elasticity E = 200 GPa and a yield stress \sigma_{\mathrm{y}} = 250 MPa, corresponding to the yield strength for ASTM A36 steel. The section modulus is Z = \frac{M}{\sigma_{\mathrm{y}}} = \frac{50 \times 10^3}{250 \times 10^6} = 2 \times 10^{-4} \, \mathrm{m}^3 = 200 \, \mathrm{cm}^3. This value ensures the maximum stress equals the yield stress under the given bending moment in pure bending. The modulus E confirms elastic behavior, as the corresponding maximum strain \epsilon_{\max} = \sigma_{\max}/E = 250 \times 10^6 / 200 \times 10^9 = 0.00125 is well within the elastic range for steel. These examples assume the beam is sufficiently slender to validate pure bending conditions, such as a span-to-depth L/h > 10, which minimizes effects and ensures sections remain . For the first example, with h = 0.1 m, a L > 1 m satisfies this; similarly for the second, selecting a with equivalent depth yielding Z = 200 cm³ (e.g., a rectangular of approximate dimensions b = 100 mm, h \approx 120 mm) would require L > 1.2 m. Under these conditions, the calculated stresses accurately represent the uniaxial tensile and compressive states without significant deviations from linear elastic theory.

References

  1. [1]
    [PDF] Pure Bending - Mercer University
    MECHANICS OF MATERIALS. S ix th. E d itio n. Beer • Johnston • DeWolf • Mazurek. Pure Bending. Pure Bending: Prismatic members subjected to equal and opposite.
  2. [2]
    Pure Bending - Engineering Mechanics
    In the process of bending there are axial line that do not extend or contract. The surface descrived by the set of lines that do not extend or contract is ...
  3. [3]
    Mechanics of Materials: Bending – Normal Stress - Boston University
    Just like torsion, in pure bending there is an axis within the material where the stress and strain are zero. This is referred to as the neutral axis. And, just ...
  4. [4]
    Lecture Notes - MST.edu
    While the condition of pure bending (bending moment without accompanying shear) is rarely if ever met in practice, pure bending is assumed in developing the ...
  5. [5]
    [PDF] 10. Beams: Flexural and shear stresses x
    The bending moment between B and C is a constant value of M = Pd . Therefore, a state of “pure bending” (zero shear force) exists between B and C in the beam.
  6. [6]
    [PDF] Lecture 5: Pure bending of beams
    Each end of an initially straight, uniform beam is subjected to equal and opposite couples. The moment of the couples is denoted by M. (units of F-L). It is ...
  7. [7]
    [PDF] Chapter 12
    When a beam is subjected to a pure bending moment, it will deform into a curved shape and this shape is the arc of a circle with a very large radius compared to ...
  8. [8]
    [PDF] 9 Stresses: Beams in Bending
    We first define a radius of curvature of the deformed beam in pure bending. Because plane cross sections remain plane and perpendicular to the longitudi ...
  9. [9]
    [PDF] Flexural Stresses In Beams (Derivation of Bending Stress Equation)
    Pure Bending Assumptions:​​ 1. Beam is straight before loads are applied and has a constant cross-sectional area. 2. Beam has a longitudinal plane of symmetry ...Missing: conditions | Show results with:conditions<|control11|><|separator|>
  10. [10]
    None
    ### Summary of Deformation Geometry in Pure Bending of Beams
  11. [11]
    [PDF] 4. Beams in pure bending Contents - Hochschule Rhein-Waal
    Feb 26, 2017 · Recalling that the longitudinal normal strain is defined as deformation divided by original length, we obtain the following expression for the.<|control11|><|separator|>
  12. [12]
  13. [13]
    Assumptions in Theory of Pure Bending - Study Material
    The material of the beam is homogeneous, isotropic, and linear elastic, in which Hooke's law is valid. The beam is straight before loading.
  14. [14]
    [PDF] UNIT-III Pure Bending of Beams
    Apr 18, 2020 · Assumptions of Pure Bending: 1. Beam is made up a no of layers which are free to expand or contract independently. 2. Beam is initially ...
  15. [15]
    [PDF] Euler-Bernoulli Beams: Bending, Buckling, and Vibration
    Feb 9, 2004 · Euler-Bernoulli Beam Theory: Displacement, strain, and stress distributions. Beam theory assumptions on spatial variation of displacement ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  16. [16]
    Euler-Bernoulli Beam Equation Derivation and Assumptions
    The beam section is infinitely rigid in its own plane. According to this assumption, there is no deformation in the plane of the cross-section.Missing: core | Show results with:core
  17. [17]
    [Solved] Consider the following assumptions for pure bending theory :
    Dec 30, 2022 · The material of the beam is perfectly homogeneous and isotropic. · ​The material is stressed within elastic limit and obeys Hooke's law. · The ...
  18. [18]
    Exploring the Limits of Euler–Bernoulli Theory in Micromechanics
    Mar 19, 2022 · More true, Euler –Bernoulli theory is valid for solid bodies in single-dimension bending, preferably with homogeneous structures, and ...
  19. [19]
    [PDF] Euler-Bernoulli Beams - Professor Terje Haukaas
    Aug 21, 2023 · Leonardo da Vinci also seems to have addressed the problem of beam bending. The two key assumptions in the Euler-Bernoulli beam theory are:.Missing: pure | Show results with:pure
  20. [20]
    (PDF) Error Analysis Based on Euler-Bernoulli Beam Theory
    This article mainly analyzes that the deflection of Euler-Bernoulli beams due to neglecting shear deformation will be lower than the real value.
  21. [21]
    [PDF] STRESSES IN BEAMS - MIT
    Nov 21, 2000 · Intuitively, this means the material near the top of the beam is placed in compression along the x direction, with the lower region in tension.Missing: Bernoulli | Show results with:Bernoulli
  22. [22]
    [PDF] 3. beams: strain, stress, deflections
    A beam is a member subjected to loads applied transverse to the long dimension, causing the member to bend. For example, a simply-supported beam loaded at its ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  23. [23]
    [PDF] Bending: Design for Strength, Stiffness and Stress Concentrations
    It is based upon the Bernoulli Euler theory which is applicable to most common ... For beam bending, σ. My. I. -------. M. I y⁄--------. = = S. ⇒. I c. --. M max.Missing: derivation | Show results with:derivation
  24. [24]
    [PDF] specification-for-structural-steel-buildings-allowable-stress-design ...
    Jun 1, 1989 · The intention of the Specification is to provide design criteria for routine use and not to cover infrequently encountered problems which occur ...
  25. [25]
    ASTM A36 Steel, bar - MatWeb
    Tensile Strength, Yield, 250 MPa, 36300 psi. Elongation at Break, 20 %, 20 %, in 200 mm. 23 %, 23 %, In 50 mm. Modulus of Elasticity, 200 GPa, 29000 ksi.
  26. [26]
    Beam theory: Bending - JPE
    This means the slenderness of the beam (ratio L/h) should be larger than 10 and the rotation of the neutral axis (θ) should be smaller than 5°.Missing: pure | Show results with:pure