Optimizing structure for toppling

Click For Summary
A user is designing a standing frame for disabled children and seeks to optimize it against toppling under a force applied at the top. They are considering changing dimensions within specific limitations, including minimum length, maximum width, and weight of the plate. The discussion highlights that while different structural designs may affect overall stability, toppling stability remains consistent as long as height and width are unchanged. The user proposes a formula to assess toppling stability, suggesting that the vector sum of the frame's weight and the applied force must pass through the base to prevent toppling. The conversation emphasizes the importance of maintaining the center of mass and structural integrity in the design process.
Harsh188
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi! everyone...

I'm a building a standing frame for disabled children, the structure in elemental form is shown in picture.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B60ALttRvwKmdzRGc0pGWlN5Z3c/edit?usp=sharing
link to picture - https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B60ALttRvwKmdzRGc0pGWlN5Z3c/edit?usp=sharing

Now, I want to optimize the structure for toppling, let's say a force, F is acting on the top most part, fig(a).
I can change dimensions but there are certain limitations like minimum length of the frame, maximum width and maximum weight of the plate. So, how do I optimize all these things keeping in condition that frame doesn't topple??

Also, can I do better optimization by changing structure as shown in fig(b), and fig(c)? if yes, how?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The vector sum of frame weight and F must go though the frame's base, to prevent toppling.

Your a,b,c variants have different structural stability, but the same toppling stability, as long h & W as the same. Unless the weight of the frame or its center of mass position change significantly.
 
A.T. said:
The vector sum of frame weight and F must go though the frame's base, to prevent toppling.

Your a,b,c variants have different structural stability, but the same toppling stability, as long h & W as the same. Unless the weight of the frame or its center of mass position change significantly.

hmm... toppling stability actually makes sense.
So, can I just say, FcosA*h=mg*W/2? (neglecting the mass of vertical bar)
 
Topic about reference frames, center of rotation, postion of origin etc Comoving ref. frame is frame that is attached to moving object, does that mean, in that frame translation and rotation of object is zero, because origin and axes(x,y,z) are fixed to object? Is it same if you place origin of frame at object center of mass or at object tail? What type of comoving frame exist? What is lab frame? If we talk about center of rotation do we always need to specified from what frame we observe?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K