THE NEUTTRAL AXIS IN BEAAIS-BJY

Adams, M.llzst., C.E., F.R.I.B.A., Etc.,

When a rectangularbeamissupportedat
bothendsandloadedtransverselytheupper
fibres are compressed and the lower extended,
the stresses being greatest in the outer fibres,
and proportionally less towards the middle of
the depth, until a la,yer is reached where they
bothvanish.Thismay
be shownexperirnenta,lly by marking parallel vertical lines upon a
beam of indiarubber as Fig. 1, and supporting
it at the ends with a
loadon top,whenthe
lines will be found closer together In the upper
part of thebeamandfurtherapartinthe
lower, as Fig. 2, while a t someintermediate
depth their distances will be unaltered, as in
line Q b marking the neutxal layer, or neutral
axis of the cross section,and showing that
reither tensionnorcompressionexiststhere.
If A, S, C, D, Fig. 3 , represent a cross section
through the centreof a beam under transverse
load, c f the maximum intensity of compression drawnto sca,le, and g h themaximum
intensity of tension, then when t,hese stresses
are
produced,
the
neutral1 axis will pass
through the intersection k of lines e h , fg, and
when ef and gh are equal this will also be the
centre of gravity of thebeam.Whenthe
stress
and
strain
are
proportional
to
each
other, and equal in tension and compression,
the horizontal lines will show by their length
theintensity of the tensileandcompressive
stressrespectivelyinthe
variouslayers.
The position of the neutral axis is a matter
of great importance and is a subject that has
exercised theminds of mathematiciansand
engineers from the time of Galileo In 1638 up
to thepresentday.Leibnitz
(1684) placed it
in theextreme
fibre of the .concave side.
Mariotte (1686) assumedthat half the fibres
were
extended
and
half compressed.
Bernoulli (1705) came to the conclusion that the
position was indifferent, thatistosaythe
whole of the fibres might be in either tension
or compression, the neutral layer being on the
surface furthest from the side where the stress,
wasgreatest.
Coulomb (1773) is considered
by mathcmaticia.ns to have been the first to
principles. According to
lay down thetrue
Todhunters History of Elasticity, p. 120,
Coulombplaced
the neutral (linealong the
axis or middleline of the beam, becausehe
argued that t.he sum of the longitudinal ten

Professor Hemy

sions or resistances uf the fibresacrossany

section must be zero if the beam be only acted
on by a system of transverse forces. This,
says Iodhunter,
is a clearresult
of an
elementary principle of statics-the sum of
the forcesresolvedparallel
to the axis of the
beam must be zero.Riccati
(1782) placed
on
theneutralsurfaceintheextremelayer
t,he concave side, supposing the whole beam to
be under varyingdegrees of tension,ashad
Leibnitz before him.
Dr. Thomas Young
(1802) was of opinion that the position of the
neutral axis was dependent upon thenature
of t,he material as regards its comparative
resistance to tension and compression, and that,
in general, it was nearer the .concave surface.
Peter Harlow in An Essay on the Strength
andStress of Timber (1817) assumedthat
the sum of the moments of the tensions of
the extended fibres about the neutral point of
any section, must be equal to the sum of the
Eaton
moments of thecompressed fibres.
Hodgkinsonobjected to this, but Peter Barlow in 1826 still thought his view to be correct ; however, in 1837 as the result of his own
experiments,hewent
over tothe
side of
Coulomb andHodgkinson. I n 1824 Hodgkinson showed by experiment that the moduli of
elasticity were notthesamefortensionand
ccmpressim of certain materials, notably cast
iron, and that in a prismatic beam the neutral
line would ingeneralnot
coincide with the
axis of figure. He stated the law as follows:
I n the bending of any body this proportion
ill obtain as the extension of the outer fibre
on one side is to the contraction of that on the
other, so is the distance of the former frorn the
neutral line to that of thelatter.
This appearstometo
be thetruetheory,but
on
account of mathematicians assuming that for
equal stressestlleextensionand
compression
are equal, they arc led
to the conclusion that
theneutral
axisisinvariably
fixed atthe
centre of gravity of the section,althoughin
stating the proposition they generally lirnlt the
a small deflection.
circumstances to
This proposition may be found in Rankines
Civitl Engineering,--p.251, Twisdens Practical
Mechanics, p. 182,IJnwins MachineDesign,
Practical
fiIecllanics,
1882, p . 39, Perrys
p. 105

THE STRUCTURAL
ENGINEER.

275

Humber(Handy
Book of Strains, p. 61)
ceptibly from the central line.
( 2 ) Amounts of
says, provided that the limits of elasticity
extension and compression in t.he case of
wroughtironcontinueto
be equal up to the
of the material of the beam be not exceeded,
complete
destruction
of the elasticity.
(?
the neutral axis will pass through the centre
elastic limit.
of gravity of
the section.
(3) T h e y
He does not
aor ne l y
say what will
equal in the
happen when
case of cast
the limits of
iron
up
to
x
elasticity are
about 2.3rds
FIG. I
exceeded.
of-_ breaking
Anderson (Strength of Materials,p.
167)
load, after this load extension yielded in a higher
adopts
Barlows
first
opinion, that
the
ratio than compression.
moments of tension and compression on either
(4)With fir battens, extension and compresside of theneutral axis must be equal,and
sionwere equalupto
of t,hebreakingload,
equilibriumby
the
form a couple, keptin
but after this compression yielded in a much
couple formed by the load and reaction. This
higherratiothanextension.
isaveryfeasible
view but takes no account
( 5 ) Amounts of extensionand compression
of the rehtive extension and compression.
are in direct proportion to the strain ( ? stress)
An ounce of
practiceisworth
a. pound
within the limits of. elasticity and even after
of theory, and an account
of actualexperithoselimitsaregreatlyexceeded,and
up to
ments will doubtless be of greater general in2 of the strength of a beam they do not sensiterestthananelaborateinvestigation
of the
bly differ.
rnathematicalprinciples.
I n 1841 theresults
Box (Strength of Materials,p. 326) gives
of some experirnents upou rectangular beams
some information on the extension and comof cast and wrought-iron and wood were prepression of cast and wrought iron under stress,
sented
the
and s t a t e s
Institution of
at
that
2.355
Civil
tons per sq.
c*
in. the extengineers in a
sion and commemoir b y
Joseph Colt pression o f
hurst (Min.
are
cast iron
Proc. Inst.
e q u a l , and
C.E., 1841).
it
hence
W i 11 follow
The object of
FIG. 2 .
the
that
the experi merits was toascertainpracticallythe
posineutraj axis wiEl be inthecentre
of the secneutral
axis and
the
relative
tion.
With
lower stresses
the compressions
,.ion of the
exceed tne eiitensions and
with
higher
at the
amount of compressionandextension
stressesthe extensionsexceed the compresupper and under surfaces of the beams when
sions.
subjectedtotransverseload.Theresults
obI n a paper on The Optical Expression of
tainedare
briefly summarised as follows:Stress, by James Love(Transactions
Civ.
and Mech. Eng. Society, February,
1877) the
(1) Position of neutral line in materials of the
mathematicaltheory is said to be absolutely
form stated in the title,
does not differ per-

Irish Branch.

South- FVestern Branch.

The
Hon.
Secretary,
to
whom
all
communicationsshouldbeaddressed,andfrom
.whom particulars may be obtained, is Mr.
P.
Kearney,
A.I.Struct.E.,
3, Lower Abbey
Street,Dublin.

The Hon. Secretary,

to
whom all communications should be addressed, and
from
whom particulars
may
be .obtained, is Mr.
F. H. Waple, A.LStruct.E., 28, Ker Street,
Devonport. .
~

proved by experiments on glass beams under

a polariscope, but in
stress observed through
this case the stresses were probably well within
the elastic llinlit.
The
practical
engineer's
view, as distinguishedfromthemat'hematician's,isthat
the neutra! axispassest,hrough the centre of
gravity at the comI3
mencement of the
bending, and that
when rupture takes
place it will have
shifted to such .a
point that the outer
fibres will have
reached their
ultimate resistance to
tension and compression r e s p e ctively, the tot11
C
depth being divided D
9
h
inthe inverse ratio
FIG. 3
of theultimateresistancees to tension and compression (Armour),
square,
roots
or the inverse ratio of their
(Anderson).
Now we come to H pointwhere the tlivergence of the various modern opinions must be
considered in more detail.
We have first the opinion ,t8hat in a homogeneous beam of any material of rectangular
CIUSS
section
(a)
the
neutral
axis
passes
through the centre of gravity of the section,
(b) thestress varies directqy as the distance:
from the neutral gxis, and (c) the extreme fibre
stressis equa.! intensionandcompression.
3, where ef repreThisisindicatedinFig.
sents the rna,ximum compression, gh tlhe maxi11111111 tension, and, being equal to each ,other,
theintersection of the lines eh, fg, a t k will
show the neutral axis at the centre of gravity
of the setetion. It is well known ,thatwith
many materials the strength. is not equal in
tension and compression but upon this theory
failure musttake
placewhen
theextreme
limit .of strength of the weaker side is reached.
Next we havethe opinion thatthestress
vnries tlirect'ly as the distal7ce f 1 w n l t,he neutra!
axis as before, but that the maximum stresses
arereachedbothintensionand
conlpression
by reason of the neutral axis shifting towards
the weaker side, as shown in Fig. 4 A4shand
.,Fig 4ar Oast Iron: .In each case

.
. ..

. '

x:

Xd

~.
1 -

t'+C

,
'

'

where t =ultimatetensilestrength,c=ultimate compressive strength.

If we call theshadedtrianglestheinertia
areas, then another opinion is that the tensile
inertiaareamustequalthe
conlpressive inertiaarea,makingtheneutral
axisne,arer
the greater stress intensity, so that the total
tensile stress shall equal the total cornpressive
stmss, as in Fig 5 Ash and Fig Sa Cast Iron.
I n eachcase

X =- C

x dThispermitsthe

c+t
stresses to form a couple

of which the arm is

Stillanother opinion isthatthemoments

of the inertia areas must be equal so that they
brlanceabouttheneutralaxis,
which will
make the neutral axis nearer the greater stress
intensity, as in the last case, but

as in Fig 6 Ash and Fig. 6a Cast Iron.

l t will be interesting now to compare t'hese
various
opinions
by calculations
from
the
actua! strengths of the two materials named,
A s h andCastIron.
Before doing so it must
be statedthat although it would seemselfevident that the extreme fibre stresses under U
transverse breaking load would agree with the
masinlum tensile and compressive resistances
or compressive stress, it
underdirecttensile
is found by experiment
that they do not coincide, but that the value varies with
the form
of the cross-section of thematerial.Several
theories have' been propounded in 'explanation
of thispeculiarity,thoughnone
of themis
entirely
satisfactory.
R,ankine assumes one
cause to be the fact that' the resistance of a
materialtodirectstressisincreased
bypreventing or diminishing thealteration
of its
trmsverse dim,ensions. H e alsosuggests that
whena
bar of
131etgl
istornasunderthe
strength. indicated is .that of the centre part,
which is the weakest, whilst when it is broken
transversetly the strength indicated is that
of
the outer part, which is the strongest. In the
case of timber it is suggested that the lateral
adhesion of the fibres prevents the outer ones
flom moving freely and hence in all cases the
actual extreme stress is considerably less than
it, appears by calculation. Inanyevent, the
differencereally exists, and instead of determining the ikodulus of rupture from the tensile and compressive strength, it can only be
h n d by 'actual expepiment on cross-breaking.

THE STRUCTURAL
ENGINEER.
I nt h e

fornlls!tt

c
'! =ZC, C
4

is ~lorninally

the extreme fibre stress but, it is reallyno more

than the coefficient of rupture for transverse
strength derivedfrom experiment. Of course
it bears some rehtion to the maximum direct
stresses in tension and
compression but cannot. be derived
from
them.
The
section
modulus Z providesforvariation
duetothe
form of section.Sir
B. Baker showed that
esfor a rectangularsectiontheapparent
trcme fibre stress was 70 per cent.inexcess
o f the direct strength of the material, and for
anyotherform
of section thesame proportion of 70 per cent. as the area of the section
bears to the area of B circumscribing rectangle.
'l'. Claston Fidler in his
Bridge Construction * ' 11lrzkes :I statement to the same effect.
H e says:" Thesimplicity
of this tlheory w o u ~ dbe
very satisfactory if i t could be regarded as a
true and complete statement of the facts; for
not'hingcould beeasierthanto
calcu!ate by
t,helast.formula
t'hc weigFt required to pro"

277

duce any given tensile stress ; and if we know

the ultimate tensile strengt'h
of the material,
it would seem t,hat we ought t'o be able, by
this means, to find exactly the load that will
break the beam. Bat if we take a rectangulw
beam of cast-ironandputthecahlated
breaking load upon it, the beam will shcw no
sympt80n1s of .tearing at the stretched fibres,
and no indination to
yield in any way; and
as a matter of fact it will not break until we
have increased the load t'o about 2% times the
amountcalculated."
I n girder and roof work it is the practtice of
engineers to calculatetheresistancemoment
of any beam by assuming C: to be the maximum working stress allowed on the material,
taking Zs for the tension side and Zy for the
compressionside,t,he
neutral axisbeing assumed t o pass through the centre of gravity of
the section.
Now takeasanexample
for calculation a
beam of ash 6 in. broad, 9 in. deep and '20 tt.
slxm loaded to breaking by a dead load in the

Ash

\C/

THE STKUCTURAL
ENGINEER:The Journal

278

centre. The weight of beam may be omitted.

Thedata for ash,takingthe
average of all
available records are

Max. direct tension

... 14,500 lbs. sq. in.
compression ... 7,400
Transverse breaking load on
centre of unit beam 1 in.
by 1 in. by 1 ft. span
834 lbs.
C or modulus of transverse
... 15,000 lbs.
strength
By thetransversebreaking
load of aunit
heam,theultimatestrength
of thepresent
beam will be

...

...
...

W = 8 3 4 X bd'
--=834XE1=20266*2
lb.
L
20
in centre.
By the method of Fig. 3 , x=y=+d.=4& in.
nesistancemoment,compression,

- bey , .2
-y = bcy'-6
- X7400*20-25
~

3 2

3
3
-299,700 extreme
lb.
fibre stress,
and
althoughstrongerintension
by thistheory,
only t'he weaker limit can be reached, so that^
we have a total of 229,700 x2=599,40@ lb. ins.
Then as

9,990 lb. in centre.

B y the method of Fig. 4

y=9-5.96=3.04
in.
Resistance moment, compression =
hey2- 6 x 7400 x 3 04'= 136,775.68 lb. in.
3
3
Resistance moment, tension =
btX2-- 6 X 14500 X 5 9G2= 1,030,126.4 lb. in,
3
Together = 1,166,902 lb. in.
Then
4 X 1,166,902=19,448 lb.
W=-4 X R = l
240
in centre.
By the method of Fig. 5
~~

Resistance nzonzent a s a couple.

bcy--6X7400X5.96~Compressive stress =--- 2
2
132,312 lb.
btx 6X14500X3*04Tensile strength =-- =
2
2
132,240 lb. Average = 132,276 lb.
2
Moment = 132,276 X X 9 = 793,656 lb. in.
3

in centre.
By the method of Fig. 6

3 - 6 8 in. y=9-3.68=5-32in,
Resistance moment, conlpression =

_
bey"_6 x-7400
_x _
5 32'_418,875.52
_ ~ -lb. in,
a

3
8
Resistame moment tension=
b t 2 - 6 x 14500 x 3 * 68'= 392,729. G
in,
3
3
(would be equal if closer measure of x and y
were taken.
Together = 811,605 lb. in.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

SunmmryBy ratio from unit beanz=20266.2 lb.

Fig. 3 ...
...
= 9990.0 lb.
Fig. 4 ...
... = 19448 4 lb.
Fig. 5 ...
... = 13227 6 lb.
Fig. G ...
... = 13526 8 lb.
E'oJlon-ing Sir 1-3. Baker's suggestion that
the experimentmon unit beam gives an app:trent excess strength of 70 per cent., and
20266.2 x 100._
- 11~)21.r,
which
reducing, W = -loo+'70
does not :lgree witheither
of t~he previous
results, so that w e are st,ill without any p r w f
of the position of the neutral axis.
Kow take for example a nmterial stronger in
compression thantension,
say a cast iron
2 in. deep,
beam 3 ft.span, 1 in.broad,
loaded inthecentreuntilfracture
occurs.
Ultimatrresistance
t o directtension
7 t'ons
per sq. in., .compression 42 tons per sq. in.,
and transverse loa,d for unit beam 1
ton. R y experiments on t h e trnnsveme

...
..

'

y=9-3-04=5-96

in.

~ _ _ _ _

Of

1'HE

1NSTiTUTION O F STRUCTURAL

strength of cast iron beams of different

mixtures, l in.
square
and
2 ft. 3 in.
between thesupports,the
averagebreaking
4
was 1,000 Ibs.
The
weight in
the
centre
equivalent loadfora
standardbeam 1 in.
27
1 ft. span would be 1000 x -=
squareand
12
2,250 !bs. Otheresperinlents give 2,443lbs.
as tln: averageloadrequired,andevidently
the'cc)mlnon rule that 1 ton in the c.ent,re will
justbreakacast
iron bar 1 in.squareand
1 ft. span is about right.
By themethod of Fig. 3 , s = y = & d . = l in.
rLesistance moment tension,
\

2+ tons,
- btx'-- l X 7 X l2~
3
3
~

ENGINEERS.

279

Together=41*33 ton ins.

Then
W=--4 XR=-X41-33=4*59 tons=10281.6
l
36
lb. in centre.
By the method of Fig. 5a,
x = c xd=- 42 X2=1*714y=2-1.714=
c+t
42 +7
a286 in.
Resistance nlonlent as a couple
bcy-1 X 42 X *286=6.006
Conlpressive stress =
2
2
tons.
btx 1X7X1.*714Tensile stress- 5 -999 tons.
2
2
~

L w d r n tons

FIG. 7

andthis being the

weaker limit, will be reached first, the stress on
the opposite edge being equal the total will be
2+ X 2 =4+ tons = 10453; lb. Then as
!
!
!
=ZC, TV=- xR=;----x10453$=
4
4
4
l?
3x12
116'1 5 lb. in centre.
By the method of Fig. 4a,
7 x 2 = -2857 inches,y=2x=x d = -~
7 +42
t+c
2857 = 1.7143 in.
Resistance nlomer,t, compression=
~bey'- 1X 42 X 1*7143"= 41.14
ton inS.
3

Average = 6*006+5~g99=6.0025tons.
2
Moment = 6 0025 X g X 2 = 8 a0033 ton ins.

x R,

.'.W= 8
1
0
0
x
3
3
= ,8892 tons= 1991.8
86
lb. in centre.
Then following Fig. 6a

= 4 7 9 8 and
in.
y=d-x=2x =-- 2 x
d7i-442
.5798= 1 4202 in. The moment
of resistance
cbx' 42 X 1X 5798'= r 7 ton
to tension will be ~- =

ins., and the moment of resistance to tension=

tbY2-7x1x1*4202' c 4 . 7 ton ins.,
but
W
_- X 36
3
3
4
9.4
= 4 . 7 ~ 2 , ..W=----=1-044 tons=2338
lb. in
9

Resistance moment, tension=

btx'X 7 X 2857%= 19 ton
_ _13
3

280

THE STRUCTURAL
ENGINEER:The Journal

centre.Here
agaiu theresultsarenot
ciently exact to prove anything.
Summary :-

suffi-

27

By ratio from unitbeam 1000 X - X 2"=3000 lb.

36
12
or 2240 X - X 2"=2984 lb
36
12
or 2445 X - X 2'=3260 lb.

36
5 lb.
4 = 10881 6 lb.
5 = 1991.8 lb.
6 = 2338 lb.
rule

By Fig. 3 = l 1 6 1

,, Fig.
,, Fig.

,, Fig.
By Sir B. Baker's

I n reinforced concrete beams where the concrete is capable of bearing a maximum working load in. compression of 600 lbs. per sq. in.,
a~nd the steel
a maximum tension of 16,000 lbs.
per sq. in., verycareful tests were made at
the ,M.cGill Uniwrsity, Toronto of the position of the neutral axisundervariousloads.
For small loads, about one-seventh of the ultimate, it v'as foundto be a t 52 percent. of
the depth of the beam; while as the load increased the position of the neutral axis altered
until it was only at 41 per cent.
of the depth
from the compressionsurface,where
itrema,ined until the full1 load of one-third the ultimate was reached.
I n this case the neutral axis starting in the
centre of tbe beam, moved towards the edge
of the weaker material as the stress increased,
but it must be noted that this is also the compression side of the beam.
If we could determinetheextreme
fibre
stresses in a beam, we could obtain the correspondingelongation andshort,ening produced
by direct stress, and from these find the radius
of .curvatureandthe position of the neutral
axis,
conversely
from
the elongation and
shortening a t a given stress we can determine
thecurvatureundera
load andthencethe
position of neutral axis.
I n t h e experimentsmade by the Commissioners appointed to enquire into the Application of Iron to Railway Structures, the elongationandshortening
wererecordedfora
bar
of cast iron 1 in. square and 10 f t . long, from
which Fig. 7 is compiled. I n tension the bar
broke with 7.43 tons,andthe
extension a t

6.6tons was 0.1859 in. I n corqxessionthe

bar was so much undulated (although confined
within limits)thatthetestwasstoppedat
16.56 tons when t,he shorteningwas 0.41149 in.
For comparisonwith thetension it maybe
stated that at 6.44 tons the
shorteningwas
0.14163in.
I n t h e diagram the extensionis
shown in open circles
and the .conlpression in
The
blackcircles of tlhesame scale of tons.
elongation or shortening by the fornzu!a

\\;here e=elongationininches,
w=loaci per
sq. in
sectional
area
in
lbs.,
Z=length
in
=
inches,E=modulus
of elasticity
in
lbs.
17,000,000 for cast iron, W O U be
~ ~

instead of 0.1839 as found by tne experinlent

in
tension.
And
e=

14453~22X10X12_0~1020
17,000,000

instead of 0.14163 as found by the experiment

in uol~pressionataboutthesame
.load, or
e=

37159*65X10X12-0,2623
17,000,000

instead of 0.41149 as found by the experiment

in compression when the loading was stopped.
Thecalculatedextension
or compression is
shownupon the diagramFig. 7 bya dotted
line, h u t strictlythiscalculation
holds good
only up to the limit of elasticity.
The results of the experiments will be seen
more
clearly
from
Fig.
7a,
which
is
to a
smaller scale, and terminates
.,vith the stress
ut; which tensile failure takes place.
The conclusion from a study of the diagranl
is that after about 2%tons per sq. in. the extensionincreases
ingreater proportion than
the compression, up to, the . ' h i t of tensile
strength,andthattheneutral
axis must,
therefore, shift nearer to the compression side.
B u t if the neutral axis shifts, the stresses on
theextreme fibresto,p andbottom,arenot
equal,butmustbegreater
on the weaker
(tension)
side.
Then
what
happens!?
Does
the beam break by tension only. If so, is the
extra strength in compression useless ?
In the case of a cast irongirder of usual
section, we have the neut,ral axis at d the e.g.
of section,and thestressintensity
on the
material proportioned to thedistance of the
part from the neutral axis.
Clarke'sTheory of Cast Iron Beams (Min.

of THE INST~TUTION
OF 'STRUCTURAL
ENGINEERS.z 8 I
Proc. Inst. C.E.,
CXLIX, p. 313)
states
that
cast
i r o n does not
follow Hooke's
Ldw, and
high
intensity of strain
does not necessitate
propora
tionately high intensity of stress.
I tt,h e r e f o r e .
follows. with
definite limiting
fibres of
stram OK stressinthooutertensile
the section, the inner fibres which are strained
proportionately totheir respectivedistances
frum the neutral axis are stressed to a higher
degree than this and therefore have a higher
moment, of resistance
than
that
assigned
them by the ordinarybeamtheory.
Moreover, if thestressstrain
curvesfortension
and for
compression
are
not
similar,
the
ucutral axis will no longer remain central, but
in a cast iron beam
will shift slightdy towards
the compression side. This increases the area
undertensionandhencethesum
of all the
tensile stresses, and thus raises the strength
of the beam t,o resist fracture. He then shows
that in a plain cast iron beam the neutral axis
4 per cent. of the
at fracture is displaced by
tolal depth of beam tcwhrds the co,mpression
side,resultin?inanincreaseinstrength
of
41.1 per cent.
Theresearches of Prof. Coker have shown
conclusively that although the neutral axis is
at the centre of gravity of the section at the
commencement of loading it is found to shift
towards thestronger side as the loadingincreases. Was it also in this case the compression side ?
There
is
one
other
supposition.
Suppose
the cast iron beam to beinfinitelystrongin
ccrnpression but comparativelyweakintension, thentheneutral
axis mightbe
considered to lie in the compressionedge of the

FIG. 74

'

beam and the failure to take plsce

wholly by
tension, as in Fig. 8. Thecalculation for our
2 x 1 beam woulcl be

-~

2 = 9%ton ins. =20907 lb. ins. or

W = 20907 x

= 2323 lbs.,
36
whichvirtuallyagreeswith
the experiments
oncross-breaking.
Conclusions.
(a) The neutral axis shifts towards the conipressionside in cast iron, (b) it seems t o be
an established law that the stress in any fibre

I.

.c
FIG. 8

varies directly 3s its distance from the neutral

axis, (c) the stress on tension side ca,nnot ex(d) acouple must be
ceed 7 tonssq.in.,
formedwith equal. forces.
Now in cast iron under the proved facts of
(a) and (c), it is clear that for (d) to take place
(b) cannot occur.
Where then is the neutral axis.?