3D statics - is there a simpler, shorter way to solve problems?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Femme_physics
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    3d Statics
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the methods for solving 3D statics problems, specifically whether there are simpler or shorter approaches compared to traditional methods involving multiple 2D free-body diagrams. Participants explore various techniques, including the use of 3D vectors and moments about axes.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that using three 2D free-body diagrams is necessary, while others propose that there might be alternative methods involving 3D vectors.
  • One participant mentions that calculations could be simplified by directly using force components instead of relying on trigonometric projections.
  • Another participant expresses confusion about summing moments to an axis in 3D, questioning the validity of this approach.
  • There is a discussion about the nature of moments in 2D versus 3D, with explanations about how a 3D axis can be represented in 2D drawings.
  • One participant notes that calculating moments about an axis may introduce more unknowns into the problem.
  • A participant reflects on the tedious nature of engineering calculations and the usefulness of computer programs for automating these tasks, while emphasizing the importance of understanding the underlying processes.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether there is a simpler method for solving 3D statics problems. Multiple competing views exist regarding the necessity of 2D diagrams and the approach to calculating moments.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about the methods discussed, particularly regarding the implications of summing moments to an axis and the potential complications this introduces. There is also mention of the limitations of relying solely on computer programs without understanding the calculations involved.

Femme_physics
Gold Member
Messages
2,548
Reaction score
1
Physics news on Phys.org
Femme_physics said:
Do I have to do three 2D free-body-diagrams like I did here ->

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=503368 Or is there a shortcut?

I take it you mean these drawings?
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/41/3dattempt.jpgWell, there is a method using 3D vectors and outer vector products, but I think you did not meet those friends yet.
And even with them, you're actually doing the very same thing! :wink:

So the answer, in my humble opinion, is: no, there is no shortcut.
You have to make all 3 drawings.

On the other hand, your calculations could have been a bit shorter.
 
Yes I meant those drawing."On the other hand, your calculations could have been a bit shorter.
"

How?
 
You kept using trigonometry, to calculate force components from lengths.
This is not necessary.

It's simplest if you always use the force components, like Tx, Ty, Tz.
And that you do not keep calculating from a projection of T with an angle.
 
True, but that can be said of 2D's as well. This is not the part that really delays me I just want to write things in details. :)

What I saw my lecturer do in class quite baffled me. He did sum of all moments to the AXIS! I didn't think that was possible..? So I was fairly confused in class.
 
Femme_physics said:
True, but that can be said of 2D's as well. This is not the part that really delays me I just want to write things in details. :)

What I saw my lecturer do in class quite baffled me. He did sum of all moments to the AXIS! I didn't think that was possible..? So I was fairly confused in class.

Let me see if I can explain.

A "moment" is a measure how strongly a body will rotate.
In 2D a body will rotate around a point.
In 3D a body will rotate around an axis.
When you make a 2D drawing from a 3D problem, the 3D axis turns into a 2D point.

If you have a pole and look at it, it looks like a line doesn't it?
Now if you keep the pole straight away from your eye, it starts to look like a point, does it not? :smile:

If you want to calculate a moment in 3D in respect to a specific axis, you can make a 2D projection along the axis and do it as you're used to.
Or you can try and calculate the various distances to this axis in 3D.
 
In 2D a body will rotate around a point.
In 3D a body will rotate around an axis.
When you make a 2D drawing from a 3D problem, the 3D axis turns into a 2D point.

I see.

[/quote]
Or you can try and calculate the various distances to this axis in 3D.
[/quote]

I don't think it's all that difficult to do, but calculating moment to an axis gives me more unknowns, no?

I'll show what I mean in a 3D statics problem I'll post.
 
I'm sorry to break it to you that much (even most) engineering calculation is copious tedious repetition of some simple formula.
Of course, since it is simple, it lends itself well to automatic (computer) calculation and there are many computer programs available to do just that.

But you still need to understand what the computers are doing otherwise garbage in = garbage out.

I once had a program (Windows 3.1) called Design View.

It was a marvelous program that allowed you to draw vectors and automatically prepared a spreadsheet for you and performed the calculations straight off your drawing.
If you then amended the spread sheet it would amend the drawing or if you amended the drawing it would recalculate the spreadsheet.

Marvelous, but I have never managed to get it to run successfully on later versions of Windows, although I still keep the original disks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
424
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K