Statically indeterminant problem

  • Thread starter Thread starter oakley45
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around solving a statically indeterminate problem related to a brake caliper's free body diagram. The user has resolved the forces acting on the caliper but struggles to determine the values for h1 and h2 due to the nature of the applied force. Suggestions include summing moments about point A and using additional boundary conditions to eliminate variables. It is noted that treating the brake caliper as a solid, rigid triangle rather than an open triangle truss may simplify the problem. The conversation emphasizes the need for multiple equations to solve for the unknowns effectively.
oakley45
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hello

I wonder if anyone can help/guide me with a problem i have, the figure below shows a free body diagram of a brake caliper, the force on the body acts at 30 degrees from the horizontal at point C, I resolved this to get the two forces shown in the x and y direction.

http://www.volkstorque.co.uk/vt/imagehosting/676474d6a22acc4e.jpg

I have determined the values for v1 and v2 but i cannot decide how to get the values for h1 and h2, they cannot be the same due to the direction of the force. The problem appears to be statically indeterminant so is there another way i could solve this problem?
Any suggestions appreciated
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Engineering news on Phys.org
This probably should be placed in the homework help section. Your original resultant force appears to go through point A (ie. try summing moments about point A to start finding reactions).
 
You definitely have a situation where you'll need two equations to get the two unknowns. You can sum the B direction and sum moments about some point other than the three points on the triangle. You can't sum about A or B because that will eliminate H1 and H2. You can't sum about C because that eliminates the other forces.

Is there anything with other boundary conditions that you could use to eliminate some variables?
 
I summed moments about A and the resultant of the components shown doesn't go through point A so you can get V2 and therefore V1. I just solved the rest of it with what he gave assuming a RIGID BODY, using superposition and the geometry given. The additional equation is that H1=H2 for each superposition. I assumed the "brake caliper" is a solid, rigid triangle. The first time I did it
I treated it like an open triangle truss but now I think the "brake caliper" is supposed to be a solid piece.
 
Last edited:
Hi all, I have a question. So from the derivation of the Isentropic process relationship PV^gamma = constant, there is a step dW = PdV, which can only be said for quasi-equilibrium (or reversible) processes. As such I believe PV^gamma = constant (and the family of equations) should not be applicable to just adiabatic processes? Ie, it should be applicable only for adiabatic + reversible = isentropic processes? However, I've seen couple of online notes/books, and...
I have an engine that uses a dry sump oiling system. The oil collection pan has three AN fittings to use for scavenging. Two of the fittings are approximately on the same level, the third is about 1/2 to 3/4 inch higher than the other two. The system ran for years with no problem using a three stage pump (one pressure and two scavenge stages). The two scavenge stages were connected at times to any two of the three AN fittings on the tank. Recently I tried an upgrade to a four stage pump...
Back
Top