Is Rothbart screwed up? Or is it me; again?

[MikeHalloran]

re: "Mechanical Design and Systems Engineering", H.A.Rothbart, ed, McGraw-Hill, 1964.

I've had this book for ages. It's gotten good reviews, and has on occasion been useful to me. Today, for the first time, I started screwing around with the section on rigid couplings (I know it's not a gear or a pulley, but it's a related issue), which in this edition is page 27-18.

The group of equations between 27.45 and 27.48 seems to include some egregious typos, like using a shaft diameter where a bolt diameter would be appropriate (to check the compressive(sic) stress on bolts in compression(sic), and some other stuff that doesn't make sense... to me. I mean, the symbol key that's supposed to go with the equations is right above them on the same page, and they seem to have tension and compression confused, and shaft diameter and bolt diameter confused, and why the hell is the polar section modulus of the shaft involved in a flange calculation, and...

If ever I had printed errata, I've lost them. I couldn't find any online.

Am I doing something wrong?
Can I trust the rest of the book?

Thanks.


Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[plasgears]

Harold probably employed the services of a language major editor vs. an engineer. In tech publishing there is a soft conflict between grad engineers and journalism grads. The journalism types believe they are better suited to the task of book/magazine writing and publishing. Been there.

 

[MikeHalloran]

Thanks for responding.



Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA