Truss Analysis - Sections Method

AI Thread Summary
When analyzing a truss, it's possible to take moments about any point, which can simplify calculations by eliminating certain forces from consideration. The moment of a force is calculated using the force multiplied by the perpendicular distance from the point of interest. If the line of action of a force passes through the chosen point, its moment is zero, making the analysis easier. The discussion highlights that understanding geometry is crucial for determining the appropriate distances when introducing additional points. Overall, using alternative points for moment calculations can streamline the analysis of truss forces.
aaronfue
Messages
118
Reaction score
0
I was analyzing a truss and when I checked my answer there was a "new" point where the moment was taken about that was not in the original diagram. After reading the text I could not find anything that stated why, when, or how to do this? I've attached the image of the answer.

Can I figure out the forces without creating this alternate point? If I were to create an additional point, how would I know what lengths to use?
 

Attachments

  • Truss.jpg
    Truss.jpg
    25.7 KB · Views: 549
Last edited:
Engineering news on Phys.org
I'm sure it was probably described in the original problem statement. My guess is it's a hypothetical modification- if these extra trusses are added how does it effect the forces, etc.
 
Hello aaronfue.

You can take moments about any point or line you like.
The moment of any force is given by the force time perp distance as usual.

Obviously if the line of action of a force passes through a point its moment is zero about that point.

So when analysing mechanisms or structures taking moments about such points eliminates forces from the equation.

In your case Fbc, Fhg, Ax, all pass through O.

This leaves an easily soluble moment equation with a single unknown.

Cool or what?

:wink:

As to the distances well that's a matter of geometry.
 
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