General loading, shear and moment relationships

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the conventions of internal moments and shear forces in loaded beams, focusing on the directionality of forces and their implications for equilibrium equations. Participants explore the reasoning behind the orientation of force arrows and the calculation of bending stresses in beams.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about the direction of forces F and F+dF, questioning why one is upward and the other downward.
  • Another participant explains that the upward force F on one side of a section corresponds to a downward force on the opposite side, referencing Newton's third law.
  • A participant raises a question about the necessity of the direction of arrows for F and F+dF, suggesting that changing their direction would affect the equilibrium equations.
  • Another participant responds that the direction of the arrows is not fixed, and if the assumption about direction is incorrect, the resulting force could simply be negative, indicating a direction change rather than an error.
  • A later post introduces a specific example involving a C-section beam and the calculation of bending stresses, indicating confusion about the signs of the stresses at different points on the beam.
  • Another participant suggests starting a new thread for the specific bending stress question, indicating that the topic may be too complex for the current discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the directionality of forces and the implications for equilibrium equations. There are multiple viewpoints regarding the necessity of arrow direction and the interpretation of bending stresses.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the direction of force arrows can be a matter of assumption, and if guessed incorrectly, it does not invalidate the analysis but rather results in a negative value for the force. The discussion also highlights the complexity of bending stress calculations, which may depend on specific conditions not fully detailed in the thread.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students or practitioners in structural engineering or mechanics who are grappling with the concepts of shear forces, bending moments, and stress analysis in beams.

emRage
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
img_s_and_bm_4_404_180_thumb.jpg


Hi everyone,

I'm struggling to get my head around the convention of internal moments and shear forces of a loaded beam.

I just can't seem to make any sense of why F is facing upwards and F+dF is facing downwards. It's driving me absolutely insane. Surely both of them will be facing upwards to cancel out wdx?

Please help =/

Thank you.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Hi emRage! :smile:
emRage said:
I just can't seem to make any sense of why F is facing upwards and F+dF is facing downwards. It's driving me absolutely insane. Surely both of them will be facing upwards to cancel out wdx?

No, the F upward shown on the left of the section matches the F downward (not shown) on the right of the next section to the left (Newton's third law!).

And the next section to the right will similarly have an F + dF upward on its left (not shown), and that matches the F + dF downward shown.

To look at it another way …

the wdx is a very small amount, and tends to zero as dx tends to zero.

It must therefore be "cancelled" by an equally very small amount …

and that isn't going to be the rather large F + F + dF, is it? :wink:
 
Thank you tiny-tim,

Now my next question is:

The arrows for F and F+dF are facing that way to cancel out the hidden F and F+dF. Why do the (visible) arrows have to face that particular direction? Because if I were to change the direction they are facing, that would change the shear force and bending moment equilibrium eqtns am I correct?
 

Attachments

  • un2.JPG
    un2.JPG
    7.7 KB · Views: 445
emRage said:
Why do the (visible) arrows have to face that particular direction?

They don't have to.

If you put the arrows that way round, and then solve the equations, you'll find that F will come out negative.

In some problems, it isn't at all obvious which way up they should be, so you just have to make a guess, and if the guess turns out wrong it doesn't matter … you'll have, say, -3N up instead of 3N down … same thing. :smile:
 
Thanks for ur help, Ok so here's the next question,

C-section beam of 300mm , Sy = 1000N
Finding bending stresses 100mm from the point of load...The force causes compression on top and tension on the bottom hence bottom stresses should be +ve and top stresses -ve.

100mm from the point of load would mean a bending moment of 1000x100 = 100000Nmm in the positive sense about x-axis.

The bending moment caused by Sy in this case is +ve Mx (moment in the x-axis). Am I correct?

I'm getting positive values at the top corners and negative at the bottom corners for bending stress which is clearly wrong!

Regards.
 

Attachments

  • un4.JPG
    un4.JPG
    20.2 KB · Views: 414
emRage said:
Thanks for ur help, Ok so here's the next question,.

uh-uh, can you please start a new thread?

(and can you make it clear where the point of application of the force is?)

Then other members will come in and help …

all this stress and moment is getting a bit out of my depth. :redface:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
15K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
24K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K