T-beams and Second moment of area

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kramjit
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Area Moment
AI Thread Summary
To find the second moment of area (I sub z) for an upright T-beam, one must calculate the area moment of inertia for the rectangular sections of the beam. The parallel axis theorem is crucial for adjusting the moment of inertia when the axis of rotation is not through the centroid of the shape. Resources such as Vectorial Mechanics: Static textbooks provide detailed explanations of this theorem. The discussion highlights the importance of understanding both the area moment of inertia for rectangles and the application of the parallel axis theorem. Overall, the participants successfully clarified the procedure for calculating I sub z for the T-beam.
Kramjit
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Greetings all,

Given an upright T-beam (really a T when you look at it) with all dimensions given, what is the procedure for finding the second moment of are about the z axis (I sub z)?

Thank you so much.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Since this is boarderline a homeowork question, I'll try to help without helping too much.

Do you know how to find the area moment of inertia for a rectangle about an axis (hint: you have two of them in your problem)? Do you know what the parallel axis theorem is?
 
Yes I do know how to find the second moment of area rectangles. But I am not sure of the parallel axis theorem.
 
The Parallel axis theorem or Steiner's theorem is on any Vectorial Mechanics: Static book.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_Axis_Theorem"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thank you

Thank you all that responded. I understand fully now.

Cyclovenom said:
The Parallel axis theorem or Steiner's theorem is on any Vectorial Mechanics: Static book.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_Axis_Theorem"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
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