Find the angle of a force by means of graphic solution

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on determining the angle of a force at point C in a beam system using graphic solutions. Participants analyze the equilibrium of forces acting on the beam ABC and the axially loaded bar BD, emphasizing the importance of the line of action meeting at a single point for equilibrium. The correct method involves constructing a vector triangle based on known forces and calculating the angle PCA using appropriate lengths from the geometry of the system. Misinterpretations of lengths and angles were clarified, highlighting the need for precision in identifying the correct triangle for calculations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of static equilibrium principles in mechanics
  • Familiarity with vector diagrams and graphical methods for force analysis
  • Knowledge of trigonometric functions, specifically tangent for angle calculations
  • Ability to apply the Pythagorean theorem in geometric contexts
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of static equilibrium in mechanical systems
  • Learn how to construct and analyze vector diagrams for force systems
  • Explore the application of trigonometric functions in engineering mechanics
  • Investigate the use of similar triangles in solving geometric problems
USEFUL FOR

Engineering students, mechanics professionals, and anyone involved in structural analysis or force equilibrium problems will benefit from this discussion.

kaffekjele
Messages
20
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A beam ABC is fastened in C and is supported by the axially loaded bar BD. There is a load F working in A.
Disregard any friction.
Use the given measurements to find the force in the axially loaded bar BD, the force in C and the angle of the force in C by means of graphic solution.

Original figure can be found here: http://i45.tinypic.com/14b2m9d.jpg

Homework Equations



The line of action of the three forces must meet in one point for equilibrium to occur.



The Attempt at a Solution



http://i46.tinypic.com/34ih0y0.jpg

What I've done is draw the line of action for the forces working through F, B and C until they meet in a single point.
I've then drawn the resulting vector triangle by starting with force F since that's the only one that is known. After that I continued the triangle by displacing the force working through C and then moved the force BD to complete the triangle. (I'm not sure if this is correct, so feel free to comment.)

I'm not sure how to find the angle of the force working through point C. I assume they mean the angle of the force relative to the beam, but I'm not sure.
Anyway, what I've tried is to use invers tangens 2,2 divided by 3,3(by means of using the measurements from the original figure) which gave an angle of 33,7 degrees, but this was not correct.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
kaffekjele said:
What I've done is draw the line of action for the forces working through F, B and C until they meet in a single point.
So far so good. Call the intersection point P.
I've then drawn the resulting vector triangle by starting with force F since that's the only one that is known. After that I continued the triangle by displacing the force working through C and then moved the force BD to complete the triangle.
I don't understand how you decided where to move BD to. It doesn't look parallel to the original BD. Maybe it's just the perspective in the image.
I'm not sure how to find the angle of the force working through point C. I assume they mean the angle of the force relative to the beam, but I'm not sure.
Yes, it's unclear - it could mean angle from vertical.
Anyway, what I've tried is to use invers tangens 2,2 divided by 3,3(by means of using the measurements from the original figure) which gave an angle of 33,7 degrees, but this was not correct.
Those are the wrong lengths. You want the angle PCA; which lengths tell you the tangent?
 
haruspex said:
I don't understand how you decided where to move BD to. It doesn't look parallel to the original BD. Maybe it's just the perspective in the image.

It's not parallell to the orignial BD, no. I moved it because I didn't see any other way to complete the triangle without having to move some of the other forces as well. I looked at an example in my coursebook and it seemed this was an ok thing to do, but I might have gone about it the wrong way so feel free to comment.

haruspex said:
Those are the wrong lengths. You want the angle PCA; which lengths tell you the tangent?

Uhm. I fear I'm about to feel stupid now, but I don't see any other way. I have the length of the beam (2,1+1,2= 3,3m) which I guess would be my adjacent side, and the length between fastenings C and D(2,2m) which would be my opposite side.

In addition you could use the Pythagoream theorem to calculate the length of the axially bar BD, but I don't see how that would be of any use since the forces are displaced.
 
kaffekjele said:
It's not parallell to the orignial BD, no.
It needs to be. You can change the line of action to create the triangle, but the lengths must relate to the magnitudes and the directions must be preserved.
I have the length of the beam (2,1+1,2= 3,3m) which I guess would be my adjacent side, and the length between fastenings C and D(2,2m) which would be my opposite side.
But using those lengths will give you the tangent of angle CAD, whereas you want angle PCA. Do you see that? So you need to find the length AP. You can get that from finding two similar triangles.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
5K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K