STRENGTH OF MA TERIALS-I
LESSON 29:
THE SPRING CHARACTERISTIC
The performance of a spring is characterised by the relationship
between the loads ( F) applied to it and the deflections (δ)
which result, deflections of a compression spring being
reckoned from the unloaded free length as shown in the
animation.
The F- δ characteristic is approximately linear provided the
spring is close- coiled and the material elastic. The slope of the
characteristic is known as the stiffness of the spring
k = F/ δ ( aka. spring ‘constant’, or ‘rate’, or ‘scale’ or ‘gradient’)
and is determined by the spring geometry and modulus of
rigidity as will be shown. The yield limit is usually arranged to
exceed the solidity limit as illustrated, so that there is no
possibility of yield and consequent non-linear behaviour even if
the spring is solidified whilst assembling prior to operation.
The largest working length of the spring should be appreciably
less than the free length to avoid all possibility of contact being
lost between spring and platen, with consequent shock when
contact is re-established. In high frequency applications this may
be satisfied by the design constraint Fhi /Flo d” 3.
As the spring approaches solidity, small pitch differences
between coils will lead to progressive coil- to- coil contact rather
© Copy Right: Rai University
7.153
than to sudden contact between all coils simultaneously. Any
contact leads to impact and surface deterioration, and to an
increase in stiffness. To avoid this, the working length of the
spring should exceed the solid length by a clash allowance of at
least 10% of the maximum working deflection - that is Fs - Fhi
e” 0.1Fhi , though this allowance might need to be increased in
the presence of high speeds and/or inertias.
Stresses and Stiffness
The free body ( a) of the lower end of a spring whose mean
diameter is D : embraces the known upward load F applied
externally and axially to the end coil of the spring, and cuts the
wire transversely at a location which is remote from the
irregularities associated with the end coil and where the stress
resultant consists of an equilibrating force F and an equilibrat-
ing rotational moment FD/2.
The Wire axis is Inclined at the Helix Angle
a. at the free body boundary in the side view
b. (Note that this is first angle projection). An enlarged view
of the wire cut conceptually at this boundary
c. Shows the force and moment triangles from which it is
evident that the stress resultant on this cross-section
comprises four components - a shear force (F cos á), a
compressive force (F sin á), a torque (1/ 2FD cos á) and a
bending moment (1/ 2FD sin á).
Assuming the helix inclination α to be small for close- coiled
springs - then sin α ≈ 0 Cos α ≈ 1, and the significant loading
reduces to torsion plus direct shear. The maximum shear
stress at the inside of the coil will be the sum of these two
component shears :
τ = τ torsion + τ direct = Tr/J + F/A
119
 = (FD/2) (d/2)/(Ðd 4/32) + F/(Ðd 2/4) = (1 + 0.5d/D) 8 Buckling
STRENGTH OF MA TERIALS-I

FD/Ðd 3 Compression springs are no different from other members

τ= K 8FC /Ðd 2 1.
in which the stress factor, K assumes one of three values, either
...K=1
when torsional stresses only are significant - ie. the spring
behaves essentially as a torsion bar, or
K = K s a” 1 + 0.5/C
which accounts approximately for the relatively small direct shear
component noted above, and is used in static applications
where the effects of stress concentration can be neglected, or
subject to compression in that they will buckle if the deflection
(ie. the load) exceeds some critical value äcrit which depends
upon the slenderness ratio Lo /D rather like Euler buckling of
columns, thus :
3a. c1 d crit /Lo = 1 - √[ 1 - ( c2 D/ λLo )2 ] in which the
constants are defined as
c1 = ( 1 +2υ)/( 1 + υ) = 1.23 for steel ;
c2 =Π√[( 1 + 2υ)/( 2 + υ) ] = 2.62 for steel
The end support parameter λ reflects the method of support.
If both ends are guided axially but are free to rotate (like a
hinged column) then λ= 1. If both ends are guided and
prevented from rotating then ë = 0.5. Other cases are covered
in the literature. The plot of the critical deflection is very similar
to that for Euler columns.
A rearrangement of ( 3a) suitable for evaluating the critical free
length for a given deflection is :
Lo.crit = [ 1 + ( c2D/c1d? ) 2 ] c1d /2

K = K h H” ( C + 0.6)/( C - 0.67)
which accounts for direct shear and also the effect of curvature-
induced stress concentration on the inside of the coil (similar to
that in curved beams). K h should be used in fatigue applica-
tions; it is an approximation for the Henrici factor which
follows from a more complex elastic analysis as reported in
Wahl op cit. It is often approximated by the Wahl factor
Kw = ( 4C - 1)/( 4C - 4) + 0.615/C.
The factors increase with decreasing index as shown here :-
The deflection ä of the load F follows from Castigliano’s
theorem. Neglecting small direct shear effects in the presence of Example 28.1
torsion : Estimate the stiffness and maximum operating stress of the
close coiled steel spring with squared and ground ends illus-
d= ∂U/ ∂F = ∂/ ∂F (T2/2GJ) ds ]where T = FD/2
trated.
= +ƒ (T/GJ) (∂T/∂F) ds
length The wire diameter d = 4 mm and the external diameter
= (T/GJ) (D/2)*(wire length)
Do = 30 mm, so the mean coil diameter
= (FD/2GJ) (D/2) n aÐD which leads to
D = Do - d = 26 mm and the index is C = D/d = 6.5
k = F/d = Gd / 8naC3 2.
in which n a is the number of active coils
Despite many simplifying assumptions, equation ( 2) tallies well
with experiment provided that the correct value of rigidity
modulus is incorporated, eg. G = 79 GPa for cold drawn
carbon steel.
Standard tolerance on wire diameters less than 0.8mm is
0.01mm, so the error of theoretical predictions for springs with
Stress factors from ( 1) are
small wires can be large due to the high exponents which appear
in the equations. It must be appreciated also that flexible Ks = 1+0.5/C = 1.08; K h = (C+0.6)/(C-0.67) = 1.22
components such as springs cannot be manufactured to the The total number of turns is now counted. This is a somewhat
tight tolerances normally associated with rigid components. The inaccurate process if the spring cannot be inspected physically.
spring designer must allow for these peculiarities. Variations in The leftmost coil here ends in a feather edge at the top, and so
length and number of active turns can be expected, so critical the end of the wire (imagined before grinding) must coincide
springs are often specified with a tolerance on stiffness rather with the vertical plane which contains the spring axis. Starting to
than on coil diameter. The reader is referred to BS 1726 or AE- count from this vertical plane - following the wire around
11 for practical advice on tolerances. towards the observer, then downwards, around the back and
upwards to meet the plane again at the point ‘a’ illustrated - ‘a’

© Copy Right: Rai University

120 7.153
therefore corresponds to one complete turn.
Repeating this, we arrive at point ‘b’ after 11 complete turns.
Continuing from ‘b’, the bottom is reached (another half turn)
without the wire yet ground to a feather edge. So the wire must
end at about 3/4 turn after ‘b’, therefore n t H” 113/ 4 turns.
Ends are not ground right down to feather edges in practice, as
shown by this cadmium plated hydraulic valve return spring.
The active turns are n a = n t -2 = 93/ 4;
the solid length is Ls = n td = 47 mm, and
the pitch is p = ( Lo -2d)/n a = ( 85 -8)/93/ 4 = 7.9 mm.
The corresponding helix angle is á = arctan( p/D) = 5.5o
-the spring is certainly close coiled.
From ( 2) : k = Gd /8 n aC3 = 79E3 x 4 / 8 x 9.75 x 6.53 = 14.8
N/mm
The solid deflection d s = Lo -Ls = 38 mm,
so the solidification load is Fs = k d s = 14.8 x 38 = 560 N.
Assuming that solidification is infrequent and outside the
working range, then this load will be treated as static so that the
direct shear stress factor K s applies in ( 1).
The corresponding solid shear stress from ( 1) is therefore :
d= K s 8 Fs C /Πd 2 = 1.08 x 8 x 560 x 6.5 / Π42 = 625 MPa.
Assume that at the maximum working state the above-
mentioned 10% minimum clash allowance applies, so that
ds - dhi ? 0.1 dhi ie. d hi ? ds/1.1 = 38/1.1 say dhi = 34 mm
Proceeding as with the solid state,
F hi = k dhi = 14.8 x 34 = 505 N and so : N and so :
dhi = K s 8 F hi C / ? d2 = 1.08 x 8 x 505 x 6.5 /? 42 = 563 MPa -
static conditions still assumed.
Considering stability at this maximum state and assuming
hinged ends (l = 1), then l Lo /c2D = 1 x 85 /2.62 x 26 = 1.25.
Since this is greater than unity buckling could occur, so investi-
gate via ( 3a): dc = { 1 - ?( 1 - 1/1.25 2 )} x 85/1.23 = 27 mm
and since the maximum deflection d hi exceeds äc then buckling
will occur unless the spring is supported by a rod or surround-
ing cylinder. Alternatively if end rotation is prevented ( λ = 0.5)
then λ Lo /c2D < 1 which automatically guarantees stability.
Example 28.2
A return spring of infinite life (ie. 107 cycles) is required for a
cam follower which moves through 25 mm, 400 times a
minute. The spring must fit over a F 15 mm shaft and inside a
F 65 mm hole, and it must exert a force which varies between
300 and 600 N. Design a suitable spring with closed and ground
ends, made from ASTM A229.
© Copy Right: Rai University
7.153
Although the material specified is not optimum for fatigue
STRENGTH OF MA TERIALS-I
applications, the solution to the problem will be a useful
benchmark for other solutions. A small safety factor of 1.1 will
be selected for reasons given previously and presuming the
consequences of failure are not severe.
Completing the characteristic, given dhi - dlo = 25 mm, F lo =
300 N and Fhi = 600 N, it follows that the spring stiffness
must be k = ( 600 -300)/25 = 12 N/mm, and further
dlo = 25 mm, dhi = 50 mm
Assuming a 12% clash allowance, then
ds - dhi ? 0.12 dhi, so take ds = 56 mm and hence the solid load
is F s = kd s = 672 N.
This completes the characteristic as sketched.
The mean and alternating load components are Fm = 450 N
and Fa = 150N, so, from ( 5b) with Sus /Sut = 0.63 and Ses/Sut
= 0.13 for A229 from Table 2, and taking forces in N
a. Fe = ( 2 x 450/0.63) C K s + ( 2 x 150/0.13) C K h
= C ( 1430Ks + 2310 K h ) - a function of C only, from ( 1).
In order to obtain a ball-park estimate of the wire diameter
necessary, assume C = 7.5 which lies midway in the usual
recommended range. From ( a) it follows that Fe = 7.5 ( 1430 x
1.07 + 2310 x 1.19) = 32.1 kN, so that the tensile capacity of a
wire suitable for this fatigue application is Fut = nFe = 1.1 x
32.1 = 35.3kN.
From Table 3, a suitable wire diameter lies somewhere between
5 and 6.3 mm; so a table of candidate solutions is prepared for
solutions based on wire diameters in this range from the R20
series of AS 2338. Succeeding rows of the table assess the
practicability of each candidate wire diameter by addressing :
Calculation of the maximum spring index via ( a) correspond-
ing to the selected safety factor (1.1 in fatigue here), with
subsequent checks for spring overall geometry - candidates A
and E do not meet the present geometric constraints, so these
candidates are dropped.
Calculation of the corresponding number of turns necessary for
the target spring stiffness (12 N/mm here).
Verification that the candidate is close-coiled ( helix angle α ≤ 2o )
- all remaining candidates conform here.
Determination of whether the candidate is absolutely stable,
conditionally stable or unstable. Candidate B is unstable here,
so is passed over.
Computation of the candidate’s fundamental natural frequency
which ideally should be at least 12 times the running frequency.
In the present case, the ratio of natural / running frequencies
for the two remaining candidates is over 14, so neither candidate
should lead to resonance problems.
Assessing whether the candidate is likely to yield if solidified
during assembly. The shear stress of both remaining candidates
when solid is much less than their shear yield, so yielding is
unlikely - though the effect of tolerance on both wire and coil
diameters would have to be taken into account in a real design.
Two candidates solutions emerge here - C and D - however D is
rejected in favour of C as it is less compact ( ?/ 4 Do 2 Lo ) and
because its OD, being so close to the limit, may cause problems
121
 when practical manufacturing tolerances are allowed for. depends upon the cantilever’s geometry and elastic modulus, as
STRENGTH OF MA TERIALS-I

Manufacturing dimensions of the chosen solution are therefore predicted by elementary beam theory. Unlike the constant cross-
wire diameter 5.6 mm section beam, the leaf spring shown on the right is stressed
mean coil diameter 38.7 mm almost constantly along its length because the linear increase of
total number of turns 16.0 bending moment from either simple support is matched by the
free length 146 mm beam’s widening - not by its deepening, as longitudinal shear
ends squared and ground. cannot be transmitted between the leaves.
Notes
Laminated Spring
Leaf springs: Leaf springs start out as bars of flat stock, which
are then heated red-hot and formed, either by machine or by
hand.

Springs are unlike other machine/structure components in that

they undergo significant deformation when loaded - their
compliance enables them to store readily recoverable mechanical
energy. In a vehicle suspension, when the wheel meets an
obstacle, the springing allows movement of the wheel over the
obstacle and thereafter returns the wheel to its normal position.
Another common duty is in cam follower return - rather than
complicate the cam to provide positive drive in both directions,
positive drive is provided in one sense only, and the spring is
used to return the follower to its original position. Springs are
common also in force- displacement transducers, eg. in
weighing scales, where an easily discerned displacement is a
measure of a change in force.
The simplest spring is the tension bar. This is an efficient
energy store since all its elements are stressed identically, but its
deformation is small if it is made of metal. Bicycle wheel
spokes are the only common applications which come to mind

Beams form the essence of many springs. The deflection ä ?of

the load F on the end of a cantilever can be appreciable - it

© Copy Right: Rai University

122 7.153