A parabolic force distribution is applied to a beam

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the correct integration method for calculating the moment on a beam subjected to a parabolic force distribution. The initial confusion stemmed from the units of w_0, which were misidentified, leading to incorrect integration. The correct approach involves integrating the function with respect to x to find the moment, ensuring that units align properly. It is clarified that w(x) represents a distributed load, and the total force is derived from integrating this load function. Ultimately, the problem simplifies to a moment balancing issue based on the total load applied at the centroid of the area beneath the load curve.
theBEAST
Messages
361
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


j9qRi.png


The Attempt at a Solution


So I noticed the units of w_0 were in N. In other words to find the moment I would have to integrate 100∫01 x2+1-2x dx. However I ended up with the wrong answer.

The correct answer requires that I integrate 100∫01 x2+1-2x x dx

However, if I do it this way I don't see how the units work out... Do you think this is a mistake? I think they wanted w_0 to be a distributed load with units N/m...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The only math involved here is simple integration so I am moving this to the "physic homework" section.
 
theBEAST said:
So I noticed the units of w_0 were in N. In other words to find the moment I would have to integrate 100∫01 x2+1-2x dx. However I ended up with the wrong answer.
The units of w_0 are in N/m2. If you integrate 100∫01 x2+1-2x dx, you get force.

The correct answer requires that I integrate 100∫01 x2+1-2x x dx
I suppose you mean 100∫(01 x2+1-2x)x dx. Yes, you need to integrate this to find the moment.
 
theBEAST said:

Homework Statement


j9qRi.png


The Attempt at a Solution


So I noticed the units of w_0 were in N. In other words to find the moment I would have to integrate 100∫01 x2+1-2x dx. However I ended up with the wrong answer.

The correct answer requires that I integrate 100∫01 x2+1-2x x dx

However, if I do it this way I don't see how the units work out... Do you think this is a mistake? I think they wanted w_0 to be a distributed load with units N/m...

In problems of this type it is easier to re-define things a bit, so units do not get in the way. Say the distance is x meters (so x is dimensionless!). Then if the "constant" is w0 N, the constant w0 is also dimensionless. This will make everything work out more easily than the original choice where x is distance (so has attached units of meters) and where w0 is an initial constant with dimensions of N/m2.

Anyway, the point is that you want to match the first moments of the forces, so you want to match force × distance (this is NOT work!) on both sides.

RGV
 
Thanks everyone! So is w(x) a distributed force? In other words w(x)*dx gives us a small fraction of the force at a certain x and then we multiply this value by x to get the moment?
 
Yes, w(x) is a distributed loading. As you have pointed out the total force supplied by the loading is the integral of the load function along the length it passes over. This total load is then applied at the centroid of the area underneath the load curve in order to have the same net effect that the distributed load itself had on the beam. From here your problem becomes a simple moment balancing issue.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top