Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,358 Year: 3,615/9,624 Month: 486/974 Week: 99/276 Day: 27/23 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A test of your common sense
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1424 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 24 of 137 (665769)
06-17-2012 7:11 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Taz
06-16-2012 5:48 PM


There is no such thing as common sense
Hi Taz,
Taking this as a standard engineering load diagram for "pinned end" loading and assuming no distributed load for the weight of the beam:
  • The load at A is P and the load at D is P (reactions)
  • The sheer load is P from A to B, 0 from B to C and -P from C to D
  • The bending load is 0 at A, increasing linearly to PL at B, then steady at PL to C, and then decreasing linearly back to 0 at D.
The deflection will be greatest in the middle, following the next order of curves (bending is the integration of the sheer curve, deflection is the integration of the bending curve).
Combined sheer and bending stress will be greatest at the load points, B and C.
With a distributed load for the beam weight, there would be added sheer and bending loads:
  • The load at A and D is 1.5wL (reactions)
  • The sheer load is 1.5wL at A decreasing linearly (-wx) to 0 at 1.5L and continuing to decrease to -1.5wL at D
  • The bending stress increases from 0 at A to a maximum of 9wL^2/8 at the middle and then decreases back to 0 at D
Thus the greatest sheer load is at the ends, and the greatest bending stress is in the middle.
Where the beam fails depends on the relative amounts of P and w and whether it is more sensitive to failure in sheer or bending, and of course the condition of the beam and the end foundations .... and whether or not a butterfly farts in Mexico ....
This is based on what I know from my education and experience, as much as I know 1+1=2, and this is why my "common sense" is likely different from yours ... and why there really is no "common" sense of things at all.
A better term would be common ignorance ...
Enjoy.
Edited by RAZD, : added
Edited by RAZD, : /list
Edited by RAZD, : No reason given.
Edited by RAZD, : ...

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Taz, posted 06-16-2012 5:48 PM Taz has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1424 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 71 of 137 (665926)
06-19-2012 9:05 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Heathen
06-18-2012 9:10 AM


the technical "language" used ...
Hi Heathen
Just to jump in here.
I'm a structural/stress engineer and deal with this kind of problem regularly.
For clarity (and correct me if I'm wrong here Taz)
The triangle at point A represents a "Simple Support" [edit: a simple support allows rotation but not translation] and the circle at point B represent a support that allows a horizontal translation and prevents vertical translation [edit: and allows rotation].
Indeed, and this is part of your "common knowledge" even though not everyone knows it or understands your explanation ...
This is part of the "technical language" of structural/stress engineering, where the symbols used represent whole phrases and contexts that someone not educated as an engineer do not know and have no way of knowing.
For instance, I can open my 4th editionSteel Manual (1967) to page 2-122 and look at diagram #9 and see this very problem, along with the formulas for stresses and deflections. (if you don't have the same edition, the page and diagram number are likely different, but the diagram will be the same).
We also know that these diagrams are idealized renditions of common problems (hence the triangle pin and roller at the ends) and that assist in finding reasonable solutions.
Message 39: He has perfectly shown how people with little or no knowledge of the subject at hand still feel they can wade in and point out what they see to be deficiencies in the diagram and therefore dismiss the question as nonsense.
When in fact to someone who knows the subject matter, the diagram is clear, consise and as has been shown in this thread, makes the point that Taz wanted to make quite well.
Indeed. This is why learning the technical "language" of a field is critical if you are going to discuss it intelligently.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Heathen, posted 06-18-2012 9:10 AM Heathen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by Taz, posted 06-20-2012 1:10 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied
 Message 74 by Heathen, posted 06-20-2012 2:32 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1424 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 106 of 137 (666054)
06-21-2012 2:18 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by Taz
06-21-2012 12:02 PM


Hi Taz,
Usually, the beam will fail in the region adjacent to one of the loads. However, if the beam is elastic enough, it may fail in the middle region. ...
The engineer/s use these diagrams to assess all the potential failure locations and modes, and then designs the beam to withstand each of the stresses.
At the ends you have vertical sheer loads and bearing loads. The foundations (triangle and roller) have bearing loads.
At the load positions you have vertical sheer (from loading) and horizontal sheer (from bending), bending and bearing loads.
What the diagram tells the engineer is that the stresses in between these points are less than those at these points, so they only need to asses the stresses at these 4 locations to design the beam ... usually with a factor of safety.
Where the beam actually fails is due more to the characteristics of the beam -- is it flexible like rubber or fragile like glass -- and on what is deemed to be failure (how much deflection is allowed, ultimate versus yield strengths) than on the loads.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by Taz, posted 06-21-2012 12:02 PM Taz has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1424 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 134 of 137 (667681)
07-11-2012 7:17 AM
Reply to: Message 133 by Stile
07-10-2012 3:42 PM


Re: Engineering Symbols
Hi Stile,
The roller, again, is part of standard notation and doesn't act like an actual, real roller would.
Correct, it would also prevent the end from rising under load. What it means is that there is no induced stress from tension load that would occur with two pinned ends under deflection.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by Stile, posted 07-10-2012 3:42 PM Stile has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by xongsmith, posted 07-11-2012 4:16 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1424 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 137 of 137 (667777)
07-12-2012 7:06 AM
Reply to: Message 135 by xongsmith
07-11-2012 4:16 PM


Re: Engineering Symbols = techniccaleze
Hi xongsmith
Well then: What I get here is that all of the drawing is fiction, but not only that, secretive codes...symbols! that have coded meanings only for card-carrying members of the Busily Esteemed Engineering Society (BEES). Nothing about this is actually at all commonplace, as posited in the OP.
Correct -- it uses the technical language of engineering and not the common language of non-engineers.
Engineers understand what is included and what is excluded in the diagram, while your objections are basically that you don't know what is included and excluded, you don't know the language.
Why not just put a board over 2 cinder blocks? There's your commonplace example.
Which in engineering technical language would be represented by the triangle and roller diagram. Your example is specific, the engineering one is generalized, so that it can be applied to more instances than just a board over cinderblocks.
Enjoy.
Edited by RAZD, : .

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by xongsmith, posted 07-11-2012 4:16 PM xongsmith has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024