
322 6 Shear and Torsion of Thin-walled Beams
6.5.2 Design considerations in torsion
Equations (6.29, 6.34) are extremely simple and efficient to use for determining the
shear stress and twist in a thin-walled closed section loaded in torsion. In the sprit of
§1.2.2 they are therefore very useful as a design tool and there is also considerable
justification for using them ‘out of context’ to get a rough estimate of the torsional
behaviour of closed sections whose walls are not strictly thin.
Another interesting consideration here is that the torsional shear stresses are re-
duced and the stiffness increased by increasing the enclosed area A, which however
does not contribute to either the material cost or the weight of the beam. If reducing
weight and cost are primary concerns in the design, the optimal choice for torsion
is a thin-walled circular section, since this has the greatest enclosed area for a given
perimeter. For a cylinder of mean radius a and wall thickness t, the area enclosed
is A =
π
a
2
, the perimeter is S = 2
π
a and the volume of material per unit length is
V =St =2
π
at. It follows that
t =
V
2
π
a
(6.38)
and the shear stress and stiffness are respectively
τ
=
T
2
π
a
2
t
=
T
Va
(6.39)
K =
4(
π
a
2
)
2
t
2
π
a
= 2a
2
V . (6.40)
Thus, for a given material volume V , the torsional shear stress decreases inversely
with the radius a of the tube and the stiffness increases with a
2
.
Of course, there are practical reasons limiting the values of a that can be used in
particular applications. The beam has to fit into a given space and connect to other
components at the ends. Also, the thickness for given V is inverse with a from (6.38)
and for very thin sections, local buckling of the wall is a limiting failure mode. The
reader can verify this by rolling up a piece of paper, taping it to make a closed section
and then loading it in torsion. We shall discuss failure modes involving buckling in
Chapter 12.
The contribution of the enclosed area A to torsional stiffness can have some un-
expected consequences when design changes are made. In my undergraduate days,
a popular student pastime was to buy an old family saloon car and make something
more sporty by removing the roof and parts of the door surrounds. However, many of
these cars were built using ‘monocoque’ construction, in which there is no chassis.
Instead, the car body is an integral part of the structure and front and rear axle assem-
blies are attached only through local sub-frames. In this case, the torsional stiffness
between the front and rear of the car relies on the roof (and to some extent the doors)
which render the car body a closed section. Removing the roof therefore reduced
this torsional stiffness dramatically, resulting in a vehicle with quite bizarre handling
characteristics, particularly on rough roads.
It is in fact quite a challenge to obtain sufficient torsional stiffness in an open car,
even with a chassis. Closed sections can be used for the chassis members, but this