# Radius of Curvature

## Homework Statement

Derive an expression geometrically for the radius of curvature of the following beam. This is part of a lab assignment for the bending of a simply supported beam with overhangs.

** I did this crappy diagram with AutoCAD, so I couldn't ( or didn't know how to ) include greek letters. Let's let r= $$\rho$$, and d= $$\delta$$ for my derivation.

a2+b2=c2

## The Attempt at a Solution

I just used the pythagorean theorem to solve for $$\rho$$.

Starting with: $$\rho$$2= ($$\rho$$-$$\delta$$)2+(L/2)2.

Factoring out ($$\rho$$-$$\delta$$)2 , solving for $$\rho$$ and simplifying , I end up with the following expression:

$$\rho$$=($$\delta$$/2)+(L2/8$$\delta$$)

I guess I have this question...is this the proper way to derive the radius of curvature geometrically? Is it ok to do it this way?

#### Attachments

• 11.6 KB Views: 308
Last edited:

## Answers and Replies

Related Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help News on Phys.org
tiny-tim
Homework Helper
Derive an expression geometrically for the radius of curvature of the following beam.

I just used the pythagorean theorem to solve for $$\rho$$.

Starting with: $$\rho$$2= ($$\rho$$-$$\delta$$)2+(L/2)2.

Factoring out ($$\rho$$-$$\delta$$)2 , solving for $$\rho$$ and simplifying , I end up with the following expression:

$$\rho$$=($$\delta$$/2)+(L2/8$$\delta$$)

I guess I have this question...is this the proper way to derive the radius of curvature geometrically? Is it ok to do it this way?
Hi Freyster98!

(have a rho: ρ and a delta: δ )

Yes, Pythagoras is fine (though you seem to have lost a factor of 2 somewhere ).

But there is quicker method (with less likelihood of a mistake):

Hint: similar triangles

Hi Freyster98!

(have a rho: ρ and a delta: δ )

Yes, Pythagoras is fine (though you seem to have lost a factor of 2 somewhere ).

But there is quicker method (with less likelihood of a mistake):

Hint: similar triangles
I ran through it a few times...I don't see where I'm losing a factor of 2.

tiny-tim
Homework Helper
sorry … my similar triangles method (have you tried that yet?) gave me the diameter, not the radius

so i got an extra 2

sorry … my similar triangles method (have you tried that yet?) gave me the diameter, not the radius

so i got an extra 2
Ok, thanks. No, I haven't tried the similar triangles because, well, I don't get it :uhh:

tiny-tim