I Area of an inclined surface with respect to the original surface

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the area of an inclined surface of a bar under tension, particularly focusing on how this area relates to different cross-sectional shapes, such as rectangular and elliptical. While the area for a rectangular cross-section is easily derived, the elliptical case raises questions about the validity of using the same formula without explanation. Participants explore the concept that the area of any cross-section, including complex shapes like horseshoes or stars, can be represented using the formula A_θ = A_0 / cos θ, where θ is the angle of inclination. The conversation emphasizes that as long as the bar maintains a consistent cross-section along its length, this formula holds true, effectively stretching the area in one direction. The discussion concludes with the notion that viewing the area as a scaling factor aids in understanding the relationship between the original and inclined surfaces.
tent
Messages
17
Reaction score
2
TL;DR Summary
Relationship of inclined area with respect to original area
Hi, I have a problem with inclined planes. The idea is to calculate the stress in an inclined plane of a bar under tension for which you need the surface. I have no idea how this surface is derived, though. In the attached file, you can see what I mean. For a rectangular cross-section, it's straightforward, just applying the rectangle area with the new inclined length. Now, everywhere I see, everyone uses the same rectangular bar as an example.

However, in one single textbook, the exercise uses an elliptical cross-section to seemingly represent a random surface. They use the same formula for the area, but without any explanation, apparently trivially and immediately deriving, but I don't see why the area of an inclined elliptical surface with respect to the original surface is the same as the rectangular one.

My suspicion is that it has to do with the vector area which, being the same direction as the normal, is somehow projected onto the other's area vector, but I don't see it. Thanks for the help. area.PNG
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
If you cut a cylinder you get an ellipse, which is just a stretched circle, so the area of an ellipse is simply pi*(semi-minor axis)*(semi-major axis). The first is the radius of the cylinder, and the second one you can find in the same way as the rectangular case.
 
Okay, I see that now. It seems to me that for all common cross-sections this is true, at least the ones I can think of, even compound ones such as an H-beam.

But what about any cross-section? By any I mean, an area enclosed by a loop that doesn't cross itself such as a horseshoe, a star/asterisk, sickle, quarter-moon, etc. Could it be proven whether or not ##A _\theta=\frac {A_0} {cos \theta}## is valid for the area of a section resulting from an inclined plane cutting through a bar with cross-section as described previously, where ##\theta## is the angle of inclination?
 
As long as the bar stays the same along its axis that formula stays true - all you do is stretch the area in one direction.
 
Alright, looking at it as a scaling factor in one direction does help. This clears it up, thanks.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top