Sign of moment in buckling of column

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the assignment of moment directions in the context of buckling columns, specifically addressing the sign convention for moments in equilibrium equations. Participants explore various examples and attempt to reconcile differing interpretations of moment directions in relation to applied forces.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question why the moment M is assigned as anticlockwise in certain examples, noting discrepancies when assigning it as clockwise.
  • One participant states that for equilibrium, M + Pv = 0 leads to M = -Pv, but expresses uncertainty about the correctness of their understanding.
  • Another participant suggests drawing a free body diagram (FBD) to determine the direction and magnitude of the moment due to the applied force P.
  • Some participants assert that the moment M must be counterclockwise at the base because the applied force P induces a clockwise rotation.
  • There is a discussion about the internal moment being counterclockwise and how it relates to the applied force, with some arguing that the assumed direction of the moment should be consistent with the applied force's effect.
  • Several participants note that the sign convention for moments (positive for counterclockwise, negative for clockwise) must be adhered to for consistency, but they express confusion over differing interpretations in various examples.
  • One participant mentions that the assumed internal moment should match the direction of the applied force moment, while others challenge this assertion, indicating it may not hold true in all cases.
  • There is a mention of the need for consistency in sign conventions and how assumptions about moment directions can affect the interpretation of results.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the correct assignment of moment directions. Multiple competing views exist regarding the sign convention and the relationship between applied forces and internal moments, leading to ongoing debate and uncertainty.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight that assumptions about moment directions can vary based on specific examples and that the sign convention may not be uniformly applied across different texts. There are unresolved questions about the implications of these assumptions on the analysis of buckling columns.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and professionals in engineering and physics, particularly those studying structural analysis and mechanics of materials, as it addresses common confusions regarding moment sign conventions in equilibrium problems.

  • #31
PhanthomJay said:
There would still be moment if the column was not ideally straight or if it was displaced laterally, even for the compression case,
Can you explain further ? Perhaps with diagram ? i still can't imagine it
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
the deflected shape under tension might be due to eccentricity of the applied load or initial curvature in the column. But in any case, increasing the value of T reduces the deflection, so buckling cannot occur.. It is interesting to note that using
d^2y/dx^2 + Py = 0 versus
d^2y/dx^2 - Py = 0 yields completely different results for the solution (the first equation involves the basic sin function while the second equation involves the hyperbolic sinh (exponential) function). Thus, the signage is very important. The first is the compression case with the Euler buckling solution, and the 2nd I believe is the tension case with no buckling solution . I can only conclude that signage is determined by negative curvature or a negative deflection value.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: fonseh
  • #33
PhanthomJay said:
It doesn't matter in which direction the column is laterally deflected left or right. First you can adopt a convention that curvature is negative when the shape is concave with respect to the beam axis facing the beam, thus, for the pinned pinned case, curvature is negative for both left or right displacements . In answer to your question on moment signage when beam is deflected left or right for the pinned pinned case, when it deflects right, the applied eccentric moment is Py counterclockwise, and the internal moment M must be clockwise, thus
(-Py) + M = 0, or M = Py; and when it is deflected left , then the eccentric moment Py is clockwise and the internal moment M must be counterclockwise, thus (+Py) - M = 0, or M = Py, which is the same result, so again, it does not matter, and in both cases since M is - (EI)(d^2y/dx^2) , the the differential equation becomes
(EI)d^2y/dx^2 + Py = 0.
So , can I conclude that no matter what cicumstances , the moment of the buckling beam should have the moment look like this ?
 

Attachments

  • 493.png
    493.png
    1.5 KB · Views: 446
  • #34
fonseh said:
So , can I conclude that no matter what cicumstances , the moment of the buckling beam should have the moment look like this ?
No. See post #26.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
12K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K