Second moment of area, storing of energy.

AI Thread Summary
The discussion clarifies that the energy associated with strain in materials is proportional to the square of the strain due to Hooke's law, which establishes a linear relationship between stress and strain. To understand this, one must calculate the work required to produce a given strain, which involves integrating the stress over the strain. The integration of Hooke's law is compared to the calculation of potential energy, where gravitational potential energy is derived from integrating the gravitational force over distance. Both cases illustrate how work done leads to potential energy, emphasizing the mathematical principles behind these concepts. The relationship between strain energy and strain is thus grounded in fundamental physics principles.
Pellefant
Messages
36
Reaction score
0
I want to point out that this is not a Homework or Coursework question. in wiki we can read the following under the chapter intution:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_moment_of_area

Assuming linear elasticity, the restoring stress that any point in the beam will provide, is proportional to the strain it experiences. This stress-strain relationship can be described by Hooke's law. The energy will be proportional to the square of the strain.

So can anyone explain why the energy is proportional to the square of the strain.

/Thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Try calculating the work required to produce a given strain. See: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/pespr.html"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thank you!

But why do you integrate hooks law when you do not integrate potential energy; m*g*h?
 
Pellefant said:
But why do you integrate hooks law when you do not integrate potential energy; m*g*h?
The potential energy is found by calculating the work done in both cases.

For spring potential energy you integrate the spring force (kx) over the distance; for gravitational potential energy you integrate the gravitational force (mg) over the distance. That's where m*g*h comes from.
 
Hello! Let's say I have a cavity resonant at 10 GHz with a Q factor of 1000. Given the Lorentzian shape of the cavity, I can also drive the cavity at, say 100 MHz. Of course the response will be very very weak, but non-zero given that the Loretzian shape never really reaches zero. I am trying to understand how are the magnetic and electric field distributions of the field at 100 MHz relative to the ones at 10 GHz? In particular, if inside the cavity I have some structure, such as 2 plates...
Back
Top