Same thing. The distance between the ends doesn't change.Ashu2912 said:
I don't think so. I think that all that is required for AC to be inextensible is that the cumulative length along the line AC be the same as in the original frame.Ashu2912 said:
" The members of the frames are axially inextensible". does that mean no axial deformation? Doesnt seem to be right..Ashu2912 said:
Pretty much.lingesh said:
Axially inextensible members of a frame are those that do not experience any changes in length when subjected to axial forces, meaning forces applied along the length of the member. This is also referred to as "constant length" or "no change in length."
The property of axial inextensibility has a significant impact on the behavior of a frame. It allows for accurate predictions of the frame's response to loads and ensures that the frame remains stable and does not experience any significant deformations or displacements.
Yes, axial inextensibility is a common assumption made in frame analysis and is necessary for accurately predicting the behavior of a frame. However, in real-world structures, there may be some degree of axial elongation or contraction in members due to factors such as temperature changes or material properties.
In theory, yes, members of a frame can be considered completely axially inextensible. However, in practice, it is not possible to achieve perfect axial inextensibility due to factors such as material properties, joint stiffness, and other external forces acting on the frame.
One limitation of assuming axial inextensibility is that it does not account for any changes in length due to temperature changes or external loads. Additionally, it may not accurately represent the behavior of real-world structures that may experience some degree of axial elongation or contraction. Therefore, it is important to carefully consider the assumptions made in frame analysis and their potential impact on the accuracy of results.
