Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-31T15:12:40.895Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Scope and Limitations of the Photoelastic Method of Stress Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2016

H. T. Jessop
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The problem of determining the distribution of stress over the various components of a structure such as an aircraft frame is one which has always presented considerable difficulty. For a large proportion of the components calculations of the stresses can only be carried out on the basis of assumptions and approximations, the effects of which cannot be estimated with any degree of accuracy and, since considerations of size and weight impose limitations upon the employment of a large safety factor, there has always existed a need for some practical means of checking the results of calculations or of obtaining more reliable estimates of the stresses.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 57 , Issue 507 , March 1953 , pp. 125 - 140
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 1953

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Jessop, (1952). The Exploration of Stresses by Photoelasticity. Engineering Inspection, Autumn, 1952.Google Scholar
2. Coker, and Filon, (1931). Photoelasticity. Cambridge University Press (1931).Google Scholar
3. Weller, (1939). A New Method for Photoelasticity in Three Dimensions. Journal Applied Physics. 10, 1939.Google Scholar
4. Jessop, (1951). The Scattered Light Method of Exploration of Stresses in Two- and Three-dimensional Models. British Journal of Applied Physics, Vol. II, Sept. 1951.Google Scholar
5. Jessop, and Wells, (1950). The Determination of the Principal Stress-Differences at a Point in a Three-dimensional Photoelastic Model. British Journal of Applied Physics, Vol. I, July 1950.Google Scholar
6. Jessop, (1949). The Determination of the Separate Stresses in Three-dimensional Stress Investigations by the Frozen Stress Method. Journal of Scientific Instruction, Vol. 26, January 1949.Google Scholar
7. Frocht, and Guernsey, (1951). The Application of the Shear Difference Method to the General Space Problem. First U.S. National Congress Applied Mechanics, June 1951.Google Scholar
8. Jessop, and Snell, (1951). Photoelasticity and Aircraft Design. Aeronautical Quarterly, Vol. III, November 1951.Google Scholar
9. Coker, and Filon, (1931). Photoelasticity, p. 502. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
10. Brown, and Hickson, (1950). Improvements in Photoelastic Technique obtained by the use of a Photometric Method. British Journal of Applied Physics, Vol. I, February 1950.Google Scholar
11. Sugarman, Moxley and Marshall, (1952). A Castable Polyester Resin for Photoelastic Work. British Journal of Applied Physics, Vol. III, July 1952.Google Scholar