Recommended Mechanics – Statics Books

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on seeking recommendations for books on engineering mechanics, specifically truss analysis using the method of joints and the method of sections. The user has explored multiple texts but finds varying approaches to similar problems, leading to some confusion. There is a noted lack of online resources for this specific topic, prompting the request for a well-explained book. The user acknowledges that the difficulty may stem from the novelty of the subject matter. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the need for clearer educational materials in engineering mechanics.
andrelutz001
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Hi everyone,

I’m not 100 percent sure if this is the right section for this question but I guess I will find out very soon.

I have come across some new material as part of my undergraduate engineering course relating to engineering mechanics, in particular truss analysis using the method of joints and the method of sections. Can someone recommend a good book that will hopefully clear out a few problems that I’m having with this topic?

Thank you in advance.

Andrei
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What kind of problems are you having with those methods?
 
CFDFEAGURU said:
What kind of problems are you having with those methods?

I’m starting to understand the methods mentioned above after looking through 4 different books. In some cases the books that I’m using are approaching similar problems in a different way. Although at times confusing I now realize that in most cases there is more than one way to solve a problem.
There isn’t much information on the Internet about this topic, (truss analysis using the method of joints and the method of sections), and that is why I was hoping that someone could recommend a particular book about Engineering Mechanics – Statics that explains the topic very well.
I haven’t exactly worked out why I’m having a little bit of trouble understanding this topic, it may be that it is completely new to me and it may take a little while to “click”.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top