Dynamics of axially loaded bar

  • Thread starter Thread starter svishal03
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dynamics
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the derivation of the consistent mass matrix for an axially loaded bar, specifically questioning the assumptions made in equation 10.51 regarding forces on a differential element. The author, David Hutton, assumes an initial axial loading condition that results in a non-zero net force on the differential elements, which can occur even without external loads between the ends. An example provided is the impact of a hammer on the bar, illustrating how stress waves propagate through the material. The analysis applies Newton's second law to the small element, emphasizing the relationship between force, mass, and acceleration. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for accurate finite element analysis of axially loaded bars.
svishal03
Messages
124
Reaction score
1
Hi,

I have a simple question and shall be grateful if helped.

See the attached word document.I have been reading the derivation of the consistent mass matrix- for the axially loaded bar.My question is:

1)While formng the equation 10.51 (referring figure 10.7), the author considers the equilibrium of the differential element of length dx.

But the forces on each end ofthe differential element can be different only if there is some load between the two ends.

IS this some kind of error that the author David Hutton of the concerned text on Fundamentals of Finite Element analysis has not considered the force(s) between the ends?

Please help.

Vishal
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
The author is assuming some axial loading initial condition. It is this loading that causes the non-zero net force on the differential elements. A common example would be striking the end of the bar with a hammer. The speed with which the stress wave propagates down the rod is determined using the one dimensional wave equation (10.52) and equals \sqrt{E/ρ}.
 
The bar can move. The equation is just Newton's second law applied to the small element. Force = mass times acceleration.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top