In engineering, a factor of safety (FoS), also known as (and used interchangeably with) safety factor (SF), expresses how much stronger a system is than it needs to be for an intended load. Safety factors are often calculated using detailed analysis because comprehensive testing is impractical on many projects, such as bridges and buildings, but the structure's ability to carry a load must be determined to a reasonable accuracy.
Many systems are intentionally built much stronger than needed for normal usage to allow for emergency situations, unexpected loads, misuse, or degradation (reliability).
Definition
There are two definitions for the factor of safety (FoS):
The ratio of a structure's absolute strength (structural capability) to actual applied load; this is a measure of the reliability of a particular design. This is a calculated value, and is sometimes referred to, for the sake of clarity, as a realized factor of safety.
A constant required value, imposed by law, standard, specification, contract or custom, to which a structure must conform or exceed. This can be referred to as a design factor, design factor of safety or required factor of safety.
The realized factor of safety must be greater than the required design factor of safety. However, between various industries and engineering groups usage is inconsistent and confusing; there are several definitions used. The cause of much confusion is that various reference books and standards agencies use the factor of safety definitions and terms differently. Building codes, structural and mechanical engineering textbooks often refer to the "factor of safety" as the fraction of total structural capability over what is needed. Those are realized factors of safety[1][2][3] (first use). Many undergraduate strength of materials books use "Factor of Safety" as a constant value intended as a minimum target for design[4][5][6] (second use).
Calculation
There are several ways to compare the factor of safety for structures. All the different calculations fundamentally measure the same thing: how much extra load beyond what is intended a structure will actually take (or be required to withstand). The difference between the methods is the way in which the values are calculated and compared. Safety factor values can be thought of as a standardized way for comparing strength and reliability between systems.
The use of a factor of safety does not imply that an item, structure, or design is "safe". Many quality assurance, engineering design, manufacturing, installation, and end-use factors may influence whether or not something is safe in any particular situation.
Design factor and safety factor
The difference between the safety factor and design factor (design safety factor) is as follows: The safety factor, or yield stress, is how much the designed part actually will be able to withstand (first usage from above). The design factor, or working stress, is what the item is required to be able to withstand (second usage). The design factor is defined for an application (generally provided in advance and often set by regulatory building codes or policy) and is not an actual calculation, the safety factor is a ratio of maximum strength to intended load for the actual item that was designed.
The design load is the maximum load the part should ever see in service.
By this definition, a structure with an FOS of exactly 1 will support only the design load and no more. Any additional load will cause the structure to fail. A structure with an FOS of 2 will fail at twice the design load.
Margin of safety
Many government agencies and industries (such as aerospace) require the use of a margin of safety (MoS or M.S.) to describe the ratio of the strength of the structure to the requirements. There are two separate definitions for the margin of safety so care is needed to determine which is being used for a given application. One usage of M.S. is as a measure of capability like FoS. The other usage of M.S. is as a measure of satisfying design requirements (requirement verification). Margin of safety can be conceptualized (along with the reserve factor explained below) to represent how much of the structure's total capability is held "in reserve" during loading.
M.S. as a measure of structural capability: This definition of margin of safety commonly seen in textbooks[7][8] describes what additional load beyond the design load a part can withstand before failing. In effect, this is a measure of excess capability. If the margin is 0, the part will not take any additional load before it fails, if it is negative the part will fail before reaching its design load in service. If the margin is 1, it can withstand one additional load of equal force to the maximum load it was designed to support (i.e. twice the design load).
M.S. as a measure of requirement verification: Many agencies and organizations such as NASA[9] and AIAA[10] define the margin of safety including the design factor, in other words, the margin of safety is calculated after applying the design factor. In the case of a margin of 0, the part is at exactly the required strength (the safety factor would equal the design factor). If there is a part with a required design factor of 3 and a margin of 1, the part would have a safety factor of 6 (capable of supporting two loads equal to its design factor of 3, supporting six times the design load before failure). A margin of 0 would mean the part would pass with a safety factor of 3. If the margin is less than 0 in this definition, although the part will not necessarily fail, the design requirement has not been met. A convenience of this usage is that for all applications, a margin of 0 or higher is passing, one does not need to know application details or compare against requirements, just glancing at the margin calculation tells whether the design passes or not. This is helpful for oversight and reviewing on projects with various integrated components, as different components may have various design factors involved and the margin calculation helps prevent confusion.
The design safety factor is provided as a requirement.
For a successful design, the realized safety factor must always equal or exceed the design safety factor so that the margin of safety is greater than or equal to zero. The margin of safety is sometimes, but infrequently, used as a percentage, i.e., a 0.50 M.S is equivalent to a 50% M.S. When a design satisfies this test it is said to have a "positive margin", and, conversely, a "negative margin" when it does not.
In the field of nuclear safety (as implemented at U.S. government-owned facilities) the margin of safety has been defined as a quantity that may not be reduced without review by the controlling government office. The U.S. Department of Energy publishes DOE G 424.1-1, "Implementation Guide for Use in Addressing Unreviewed Safety Question Requirements" as a guide for determining how to identify and determine whether a margin of safety will be reduced by a proposed change. The guide develops and applies the concept of a qualitative margin of safety that may not be explicit or quantifiable, yet can be evaluated conceptually to determine whether an increase or decrease will occur with a proposed change. This approach becomes important when examining designs with large or undefined (historical) margins and those that depend on "soft" controls such as programmatic limits or requirements. The commercial U.S. nuclear industry utilized a similar concept in evaluating planned changes until 2001, when 10 CFR 50.59 was revised to capture and apply the information available in facility-specific risk analyses and other quantitative risk management tools.
Reserve factor
A measure of strength frequently used in Europe is the reserve factor (RF). With the strength and applied loads expressed in the same units, the reserve factor is defined in one of two ways, depending on the industry:
The applied loads have many factors, including factors of safety applied.
Yield and ultimate calculations
For ductile materials (e.g. most metals), it is often required that the factor of safety be checked against both yield and ultimate strengths. The yield calculation will determine the safety factor until the part starts to deform plastically. The ultimate calculation will determine the safety factor until failure. In brittle materials the yield and ultimate strengths are often so close as to be indistinguishable, so it is usually acceptable to only calculate the ultimate safety factor.
Choosing design factors
Appropriate design factors are based on several considerations, such as the accuracy of predictions on the imposed loads, strength, wear estimates, and the environmental effects to which the product will be exposed in service; the consequences of engineering failure; and the cost of over-engineering the component to achieve that factor of safety [citation needed]. For example, components whose failure could result in substantial financial loss, serious injury, or death may use a safety factor of four or higher (often ten). Non-critical components generally might have a design factor of two. Risk analysis, failure mode and effects analysis, and other tools are commonly used. Design factors for specific applications are often mandated by law, policy, or industry standards.
Buildings commonly use a factor of safety of 2.0 for each structural member. The value for buildings is relatively low because the loads are well understood and most structures are redundant. Pressure vessels use 3.5 to 4.0, automobiles use 3.0, and aircraft and spacecraft use 1.2 to 4.0 depending on the application and materials. Ductile, metallic materials tend to use the lower value while brittle materials use the higher values. The field of aerospace engineering uses generally lower design factors because the costs associated with structural weight are high (i.e. an aircraft with an overall safety factor of 5 would probably be too heavy to get off the ground). This low design factor is why aerospace parts and materials are subject to very stringent quality control and strict preventative maintenance schedules to help ensure reliability. A usually applied Safety Factor is 1.5, but for pressurized fuselage it is 2.0, and for main landing gear structures it is often 1.25.[11]
In some cases it is impractical or impossible for a part to meet the "standard" design factor. The penalties (mass or otherwise) for meeting the requirement would prevent the system from being viable (such as in the case of aircraft or spacecraft). In these cases, it is sometimes determined to allow a component to meet a lower than normal safety factor, often referred to as "waiving" the requirement. Doing this often brings with it extra detailed analysis or quality control verifications to assure the part will perform as desired, as it will be loaded closer to its limits.
For loading that is cyclical, repetitive, or fluctuating, it is important to consider the possibility of metal fatigue when choosing factor of safety. A cyclic load well below a material's yield strength can cause failure if it is repeated through enough cycles.
History
According to Elishakoff[12][13] the notion of factor of safety in engineering context was apparently first introduced in 1729 by Bernard Forest de Bélidor (1698-1761) [14] who was a French engineer working in hydraulics, mathematics, civil, and military engineering. The philosophical aspects of factors of safety were pursued by Doorn and Hansson. [15]
↑ NASA-STD-5001: Structural Design and Test Factors for Spaceflight Hardware, section 3. NASA, 2008.
↑ AIAA S-110: Space Systems - Structures, Structural Components, and Structural Assemblies, section 4.2. AIAA, 2005.
↑ Burr, A and Cheatham, J: Mechanical Design and Analysis, 2nd edition, section 5.2. Prentice-Hall, 1995.
↑ Elishakoff, I. Safety factors and reliability: friends or foes?, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2004
↑ Elishakoff, I., Interrelation between safety factors and reliability, NASA/CR-2001-211309, 2001
↑ de Bélidor, Bernard Forest, La science des ingénieurs, dans la conduite des travaux de fortification et d'architecture civile, Paris: Chez Claude Jombert 1729
↑ Doorn, N. and Hansson, S.O., Should probabilistic design replace safety factors?, Philosophy & Technology, 24(2), pp.151-16, 2011
Further reading
Lalanne, C., Specification Development - 2nd Ed., ISTE-Wiley, 2009
Related Research Articles
The field of strength of materials typically refers to various methods of calculating the stresses and strains in structural members, such as beams, columns, and shafts. The methods employed to predict the response of a structure under loading and its susceptibility to various failure modes takes into account the properties of the materials such as its yield strength, ultimate strength, Young's modulus, and Poisson's ratio. In addition, the mechanical element's macroscopic properties such as its length, width, thickness, boundary constraints and abrupt changes in geometry such as holes are considered.
Structural analysis is a branch of solid mechanics which uses simplified models for solids like bars, beams and shells for engineering decision making. Its main objective is to determine the effect of loads on the physical structures and their components. In contrast to theory of elasticity, the models used in structure analysis are often differential equations in one spatial variable. Structures subject to this type of analysis include all that must withstand loads, such as buildings, bridges, aircraft and ships. Structural analysis uses ideas from applied mechanics, materials science and applied mathematics to compute a structure's deformations, internal forces, stresses, support reactions, velocity, accelerations, and stability. The results of the analysis are used to verify a structure's fitness for use, often precluding physical tests. Structural analysis is thus a key part of the engineering design of structures.
In mechanics, compressive strength is the capacity of a material or structure to withstand loads tending to reduce size. In other words, compressive strength resists compression, whereas tensile strength resists tension. In the study of strength of materials, tensile strength, compressive strength, and shear strength can be analyzed independently.
In materials science, fatigue is the initiation and propagation of cracks in a material due to cyclic loading. Once a fatigue crack has initiated, it grows a small amount with each loading cycle, typically producing striations on some parts of the fracture surface. The crack will continue to grow until it reaches a critical size, which occurs when the stress intensity factor of the crack exceeds the fracture toughness of the material, producing rapid propagation and typically complete fracture of the structure.
Limit State Design (LSD), also known as Load And Resistance Factor Design (LRFD), refers to a design method used in structural engineering. A limit state is a condition of a structure beyond which it no longer fulfills the relevant design criteria. The condition may refer to a degree of loading or other actions on the structure, while the criteria refer to structural integrity, fitness for use, durability or other design requirements. A structure designed by LSD is proportioned to sustain all actions likely to occur during its design life, and to remain fit for use, with an appropriate level of reliability for each limit state. Building codes based on LSD implicitly define the appropriate levels of reliability by their prescriptions.
Stress–strain analysis is an engineering discipline that uses many methods to determine the stresses and strains in materials and structures subjected to forces. In continuum mechanics, stress is a physical quantity that expresses the internal forces that neighboring particles of a continuous material exert on each other, while strain is the measure of the deformation of the material.
In solid mechanics, a stress concentration is a location in an object where the stress is significantly greater than the surrounding region. Stress concentrations occur when there are irregularities in the geometry or material of a structural component that cause an interruption to the flow of stress. This arises from such details as holes, grooves, notches and fillets. Stress concentrations may also occur from accidental damage such as nicks and scratches.
In structural engineering, buckling is the sudden change in shape (deformation) of a structural component under load, such as the bowing of a column under compression or the wrinkling of a plate under shear. If a structure is subjected to a gradually increasing load, when the load reaches a critical level, a member may suddenly change shape and the structure and component is said to have buckled. Euler's critical load and Johnson's parabolic formula are used to determine the buckling stress of a column.
Fracture mechanics is the field of mechanics concerned with the study of the propagation of cracks in materials. It uses methods of analytical solid mechanics to calculate the driving force on a crack and those of experimental solid mechanics to characterize the material's resistance to fracture.
In continuum mechanics, the maximum distortion energy criterion states that yielding of a ductile material begins when the second invariant of deviatoric stress reaches a critical value. It is a part of plasticity theory that mostly applies to ductile materials, such as some metals. Prior to yield, material response can be assumed to be of a nonlinear elastic, viscoelastic, or linear elastic behavior.
Reliability engineering is a sub-discipline of systems engineering that emphasizes the ability of equipment to function without failure. Reliability describes the ability of a system or component to function under stated conditions for a specified period of time. Reliability is closely related to availability, which is typically described as the ability of a component or system to function at a specified moment or interval of time.
In engineering, shear strength is the strength of a material or component against the type of yield or structural failure when the material or component fails in shear. A shear load is a force that tends to produce a sliding failure on a material along a plane that is parallel to the direction of the force. When a paper is cut with scissors, the paper fails in shear.
The strength of ships is a topic of key interest to naval architects and shipbuilders. Ships which are built too strong are heavy, slow, and cost extra money to build and operate since they weigh more, whilst ships which are built too weakly suffer from minor hull damage and in some extreme cases catastrophic failure and sinking.
The fatigue limit or endurance limit is the stress level below which an infinite number of loading cycles can be applied to a material without causing fatigue failure. Some metals such as ferrous alloys and titanium alloys have a distinct limit, whereas others such as aluminium and copper do not and will eventually fail even from small stress amplitudes. Where materials do not have a distinct limit the term fatigue strength or endurance strength is used and is defined as the maximum value of completely reversed bending stress that a material can withstand for a specified number of cycles without a fatigue failure.
In materials science and engineering, the yield point is the point on a stress-strain curve that indicates the limit of elastic behavior and the beginning of plastic behavior. Below the yield point, a material will deform elastically and will return to its original shape when the applied stress is removed. Once the yield point is passed, some fraction of the deformation will be permanent and non-reversible and is known as plastic deformation.
A structural load or structural action is a force, deformation, or acceleration applied to structural elements. A load causes stress, deformation, and displacement in a structure. Structural analysis, a discipline in engineering, analyzes the effects of loads on structures and structural elements. Excess load may cause structural failure, so this should be considered and controlled during the design of a structure. Particular mechanical structures—such as aircraft, satellites, rockets, space stations, ships, and submarines—are subject to their own particular structural loads and actions. Engineers often evaluate structural loads based upon published regulations, contracts, or specifications. Accepted technical standards are used for acceptance testing and inspection.
Probabilistic design is a discipline within engineering design. It deals primarily with the consideration and minimization of the effects of random variability upon the performance of an engineering system during the design phase. Typically, these effects studied and optimized are related to quality and reliability. It differs from the classical approach to design by assuming a small probability of failure instead of using the safety factor. Probabilistic design is used in a variety of different applications to assess the likelihood of failure. Disciplines which extensively use probabilistic design principles include product design, quality control, systems engineering, machine design, civil engineering and manufacturing.
Within the branch of materials science known as material failure theory, the Goodman relation is an equation used to quantify the interaction of mean and alternating stresses on the fatigue life of a material. The equation is typically presented as a linear curve of mean stress vs. alternating stress that provides the maximum number of alternating stress cycles a material will withstand before failing from fatigue.
Material failure theory is an interdisciplinary field of materials science and solid mechanics which attempts to predict the conditions under which solid materials fail under the action of external loads. The failure of a material is usually classified into brittle failure (fracture) or ductile failure (yield). Depending on the conditions most materials can fail in a brittle or ductile manner or both. However, for most practical situations, a material may be classified as either brittle or ductile.
Structural engineering depends upon a detailed knowledge of loads, physics and materials to understand and predict how structures support and resist self-weight and imposed loads. To apply the knowledge successfully structural engineers will need a detailed knowledge of mathematics and of relevant empirical and theoretical design codes. They will also need to know about the corrosion resistance of the materials and structures, especially when those structures are exposed to the external environment.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
