Mathematical help with structural analysis.

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on a structural analysis equation involving the transition between terms in a mathematical expression. The user questions the validity of equating da_j\delta_{lj} to da_l, suggesting it implies l=j. Another participant suggests simplifying the derivation by focusing on the second line of the equation and substituting variables appropriately. The discussion references a resource from MIT OpenCourseWare for clearer explanations of strain tensors.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of structural analysis concepts
  • Familiarity with mathematical notation in mechanics
  • Knowledge of strain tensors and their applications
  • Basic algebraic manipulation skills
NEXT STEPS
  • Review the derivation of strain tensors in solid mechanics
  • Study the implications of variable substitution in mathematical equations
  • Explore resources on structural analysis from MIT OpenCourseWare
  • Practice algebraic manipulation in the context of engineering mechanics
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in civil engineering, structural analysis, and mechanics who seek clarity on mathematical derivations and variable manipulation in equations.

ENgez
Messages
69
Reaction score
0
In the attached equation from structural analysis, I don't understand the transition between the second and third equal signs. I think that u_{j,l}da_l = u_{j,1}da_1+u_{j,2}da_2+u_{j,3}da_3, so doesn't equating da_j\delta_{lj} = da_l assume that l=j. can anyone help me see why this assumption is justified?
 

Attachments

  • attachment.PNG
    attachment.PNG
    12.5 KB · Views: 502
Engineering news on Phys.org
Are they just changing variables?
Maybe just ignore the third line. Start with the second line and carry through the algebra... For example, consider the first term in the second line:

First term in second line: u_{j,l}da_l da_i\delta_{ij}=u_{i,l}da_l da_j

Just replace i with j and replace l with i and presto! But that might be cheating... what text is that from?

More simple derivation here, btw: http://utsv.net/solid-mechanics/2-strain/strain-tensors -- middle of page
 
thanks, this is from mit ocw. i had to resort to it because my lecturer is truly terrible at conveying this stuff...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 64 ·
3
Replies
64
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K