Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A test of your common sense
Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


(1)
Message 94 of 137 (666007)
06-20-2012 5:57 PM
Reply to: Message 90 by ringo
06-20-2012 12:33 PM


The point is for all intent and purposes it doesn't matter where failure occur in this particular case. I was just demonstrating how something that appears so simple can be so complex without proper training. You can't use common sense to arrive at the answer for something like this. It takes a lot of proper training and experience.
I was really hoping for some more creationist participation in this thread, since a lot of them seem to be all knowing. Instead, I think I just pissed off a bunch of evilutionists LOL.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by ringo, posted 06-20-2012 12:33 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by Heathen, posted 06-21-2012 2:31 AM Taz has replied
 Message 97 by Buzsaw, posted 06-21-2012 8:28 AM Taz has not replied
 Message 103 by ringo, posted 06-21-2012 12:38 PM Taz has replied
 Message 126 by Chuck77, posted 06-22-2012 6:31 AM Taz has not replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


(4)
Message 102 of 137 (666044)
06-21-2012 12:02 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Heathen
06-21-2012 2:31 AM


Haha, ok ok.
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. In this particular case, the end condition is set to fail. Left end more than right end.
Edit.
And notice how my member ratings went from 8.0 from the start of this thread to 6.9 at the moment.
Edited by Taz, : No reason given.
Edited by Taz, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Heathen, posted 06-21-2012 2:31 AM Heathen has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 106 by RAZD, posted 06-21-2012 2:18 PM Taz has not replied
 Message 108 by Tangle, posted 06-21-2012 5:22 PM Taz has replied
 Message 118 by Minnemooseus, posted 06-21-2012 10:06 PM Taz has not replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 104 of 137 (666049)
06-21-2012 1:35 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by ringo
06-21-2012 12:38 PM


Jesus christ, you still fail to see the point. Something like this really does represent normal everyday thing. Suppose you and your wife sits on one of those lawn chairs.
And both of you have been trying to gain the title of the fattest mother fuckers on guiness book of records.
Or how about this. Recently one of my friends made a homemade dolly thing to push his plants around. He does a lot of outdoor and indoor gardening. His dolly thing looks like this.
The area between the larger circle and the smaller circle represents the area of contact between the plant pot and the dolly thing. Where do you suppose the best place for the wheels will be for the dolly?
If it were me, I'd put the wheels toward the outside for stability and support. This guy actually put the wheels very close together toward the center. His reasoning to me was if the dolly thing was going to break it will break in the middle so he better support the middle. Here's the problem. Every time he pushes it around, the plant tends to tip over due to lack of stability.
That's what normal everyday people do. See the similarities between my beam example and the dolly thing?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by ringo, posted 06-21-2012 12:38 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by ringo, posted 06-21-2012 1:57 PM Taz has replied
 Message 125 by Heathen, posted 06-22-2012 5:42 AM Taz has replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


(2)
Message 109 of 137 (666066)
06-21-2012 5:35 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by ringo
06-21-2012 1:57 PM


Common sense is hit or miss. There are cases where common sense will suffice. But the problem is it could miss just as well as hit.
My example does relate to the EvC debate. Why do you think there are so many engineers who are creationists? Just because you're an expert in one field doesn't mean you can speak with authority in another. As is demonstrated by this thread.
There are some very intelligent people here from all kinds of backgrounds. And my one little example frustrated people enough to have dropped my member rating from 8.0 to 6.9... and it's probably still dropping. Think how frustrating it must be for the creationist engineers. To them, life is obviously "designed".
I specifically brought in a simple engineering problem for a reason. Look at how many people insisted that the diagram did not have enough info. As an experiment, I went ahead and showed this diagram to 4 other engineers. The moment they saw the diagram, they all gave their answer right away. No need to know what the beam is made of or all the other nonrelevant details that members here insisted they needed. Heck, I went ahead and showed this to an architech and he gave his answer right away without enquiring for more details.
What the members here did by insisting the diagram made no sense or didn't have enough info was overstepping their boundaries and trying to tell the 2 engineers here what's what. Sound familiar? Here in EvC, we get creationists trying to tell scientists what's what all the time.
I'm also appalled at how many people switched to defensive mode when they realized they were confused by the diagram.
Again, I wasn't even looking for a specific engineering answer. A simple guess would have done it. I'm not here to laugh at anyone. Just disappointed I saw the same reaction/behavior I usually see in creationists when confronted with confusion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by ringo, posted 06-21-2012 1:57 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by Rahvin, posted 06-21-2012 6:03 PM Taz has not replied
 Message 113 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-21-2012 8:59 PM Taz has replied
 Message 129 by ringo, posted 06-22-2012 12:08 PM Taz has not replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 110 of 137 (666067)
06-21-2012 5:42 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by Tangle
06-21-2012 5:22 PM


Tangle writes:
You see, when some of us gave you the "well it depends" answer which gave the circumstances when it would fail in each of those places, we were accused of 'over thinking the problem'. Now the answer turns out to depend on those exact same assumptions.
Well, I would have accepted the "well, it depends...". But some people here were asking for really non-relevant details with a lot of technical verbose.
As I said in my previous post, I showed this to 4 engineers and 1 architect and they all gave an answer right away.
And as I explained, the answer isn't that important. It's how people reacted. Notice how many went into defensive posture. Some even calling the diagram nonsense.
I really do think you picked the wrong audience.
No, I think I picked the right audience. No one is an expert in everything. I don't know jack shit about geology, for example (pardon my french). That doesn't make me any less of an engineer. Not knowing the answer to this problem doesn't make you any less of whatever the hell you are. And yet here we are having a bunch of very intelligent people going into defensive mode over a simple diagram.
Edited by Taz, : No reason given.
Edited by Taz, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by Tangle, posted 06-21-2012 5:22 PM Tangle has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by Coyote, posted 06-21-2012 6:44 PM Taz has replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 114 of 137 (666084)
06-21-2012 9:05 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by Coyote
06-21-2012 6:44 PM


Combo of what I said. Again, I wasn't looking for a definitive answer with 20 pages of mathematical proof and 20 days of intense experiments inside a $200 million facility. Just simply look at the diagram and tell me what you think.
With simply supported beams or anything that's long and hard and full of seamen... or just long and hard, failure tend to occur adjacent to where the point loads are. Most of the time, it's either one or the other, although it could occur at both places. In this particular case, the left end is set up to fail. Now, if failure occurs as a result of bending, then more than likely the middle region would fail.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by Coyote, posted 06-21-2012 6:44 PM Coyote has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by fearandloathing, posted 06-21-2012 9:33 PM Taz has not replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 115 of 137 (666085)
06-21-2012 9:07 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by Dr Adequate
06-21-2012 8:59 PM


Silly DrA, hasn't it occurred to you that that's part of the answer? You mean to tell me life is more complicated than a classic text book problem?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-21-2012 8:59 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-21-2012 9:53 PM Taz has not replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 132 of 137 (666150)
06-22-2012 2:06 PM
Reply to: Message 125 by Heathen
06-22-2012 5:42 AM


Heathen writes:
The point of the wheels is to transfer the load to the ground.
so put the wheels directly under where the plant pot transfers its load to the dolly.
that is the simplest most straight forward load path. a straight line down.
otherwise you're introducing a moment into the cross members.
I know. But the guy insisted to me that the middle is where it will break and therefore putting the wheels toward the center will help it... or something like that. You can't argue with people like that.
Edit.
Perhaps I should be more clear. The dolly thing was made of wood. Just by carrying the pot around, it was clear to me that the pot wasn't going to break the dolly thing any time soon. That's why I thought it was better to put the wheels toward the outside for stability. Now, if the pot was heavier, then yes put the wheels directly underneath. But putting them toward the middle is just plain stupid.
In this particular case, the guy's common sense clearly told him the middle was going to break and therefore he needed to put the wheels underneath there. But from our perspective, that actually made it worse. Anyway, I tried for about a couple sentences to get him to change his mind. The thing about me is I don't like to argue with people who can't understand me. So, I just gave up and agreed with him. No point in demonstrating to him how it actually works.
Edited by Taz, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by Heathen, posted 06-22-2012 5:42 AM Heathen has not replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 136 of 137 (667757)
07-12-2012 12:05 AM
Reply to: Message 135 by xongsmith
07-11-2012 4:16 PM


Re: Engineering Symbols
Jesus H christ...
Ok, if the pin and roller bother you that much, just replace them with 2 cider blocks. Good god...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by xongsmith, posted 07-11-2012 4:16 PM xongsmith has 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