Understanding Statics Analysis for a Simple Square Truss Design

  • Thread starter Thread starter dhume878
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Statics
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the statics analysis of a simple square truss design, specifically focusing on determining the reaction forces at supports A and B. The user is confused about the need for a moment reaction at B, questioning if they are oversimplifying the problem. Clarifications reveal that the truss is not rigid and that the joints at points A, B, C, and D are fixed but can flex under load, which complicates the analysis. Participants emphasize the importance of considering moments and the stiffness of the joints and rods in the calculations. Overall, the analysis aims to ensure that the truss does not reach failure under applied forces.
dhume878
Messages
6
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


There isn't really a problem statement. This is for something I am myself designing but I'm struggling conceptually with the basic statics analysis. It's a simple square truss. If I were to write a problem statement it would be "What are the reaction forces at A and B?"

My problem is, I feel like there should be a moment reaction at B. Am I simplifying this too much? Thank you in advance for any help

Homework Equations


2nd law:
∑F=0, ∑M = 0

The Attempt at a Solution


http://i.imgur.com/RtL8b17.jpg[/B]
RtL8b17.jpg
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Please clarify. Is it a rigid weightless square, attached at (not merely sitting upon) supports A and B? And the only applied force is F1?
If so, your equations are OK, but you need to take moments too. What point you take them about is not important - just make it somewhere convenient.
 
The square is not rigid, I think that is the fact that is confusing me.

The points A,B,C,D are not pinned, they are fixed via some kind of joint (to represent a more complex joint). So A - D can fail given some moment or max force, and I want to analyze the system to ensure that those values will not reach the point of failure.
 
dhume878 said:
The square is not rigid, I think that is the fact that is confusing me.

The points A,B,C,D are not pinned, they are fixed via some kind of joint (to represent a more complex joint). So A - D can fail given some moment or max force, and I want to analyze the system to ensure that those values will not reach the point of failure.
I guess you mean the joints do not freely rotate but they can flex in response to load, yes? So there is some stiffness factor, which needs to be known?
What about the rods themselves? Are they to be rigid or flexible to some degree?
If the lower corners are not pinned to their supports, the only force preventing the frame from rotating is its own weight, but you do not show that on the diagram.
 
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Correct statement about a reservoir with an outlet pipe'
The answer to this question is statements (ii) and (iv) are correct. (i) This is FALSE because the speed of water in the tap is greater than speed at the water surface (ii) I don't even understand this statement. What does the "seal" part have to do with water flowing out? Won't the water still flow out through the tap until the tank is empty whether the reservoir is sealed or not? (iii) In my opinion, this statement would be correct. Increasing the gravitational potential energy of the...
Back
Top