What are the elements of the strain tensor for a wide beam under bending?

AI Thread Summary
For a wide beam bending about the y-axis, the strain tensor elements can be described by considering the contraction above the x-axis and expansion below it. The beam's dimensions, specifically height (h) and breadth (b), are crucial, with a wide beam defined as having b significantly greater than h. Strain in the z-direction is approximately zero at the neutral axis, leading to a relationship between stress and strain influenced by Poisson's ratio. The strain tensor can be modified by a constant factor, reflecting the engineering strain versus tensor strain distinction. Understanding these principles is essential for accurate modeling in finite element analysis and structural engineering.
lewis198
Messages
95
Reaction score
0
If I have a wide beam, parallel to the x axis, with its COM at the origin, then I want it to curve about the y axis, what would the elements of the strain tensor be?

I have come to the conlusion that the beam would, for example,contract above x-axis and expand below it. But I don't know how to describe strain relative to the y and z axes, and then how to translate this knowledge to the strain tensor.

Thanks for your time.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
lewis198 said:
If I have a wide beam, parallel to the x axis, with its COM at the origin, then I want it to curve about the y axis, what would the elements of the strain tensor be?

I have come to the conlusion that the beam would, for example,contract above x-axis and expand below it. But I don't know how to describe strain relative to the y and z axes, and then how to translate this knowledge to the strain tensor.

Thanks for your time.

"wide beam" to me sounds like a shell.

Reissner-Mindlin shell theory is what is used in Finite Element Analysis. They neglect the higher order terms but there is a lot of information on the subject.

If you are more interested in analytical theory that is analogous to standard beam theory, then I believe "Kirchhoff-Love" would be what you are looking for.

Hope that helps,
 
Hello Lewis, you really need to supply more information.

Wide beam? : What sort of wide beam?

Wide flanged I beams are available for increased bending resistance and their properties are tabulated.

There are code requirements and specifications for wide RC beams.

I am going to assume a simple homogeneous rectangular wide beam of height h in the y direction and breadth b in the z direction.

Yes you need also to specify the z direction - wide beams are 3 dimensional.

A beam is considered wide when

b >> h say 5 times or more.

Under these conditions the material is not free to expand or contract in the lateral z direction under bending along the x direction about the y direction. (note I said direction not axis)

In particular εz ≈ 0 at z=0 so


{\varepsilon _z} = \frac{1}{E}[{\sigma _z} - \nu \left( {{\sigma _x} + {\sigma _y}} \right) \approx 0

Since h is small σy ≈ 0 So

{\sigma _z} = \nu {\sigma _{{x_{z = 0}}}}

Thus

{\varepsilon _x} = \frac{{1 - {\nu ^2}}}{E}{\sigma _x} = \frac{{1 - {\nu ^2}}}{{E{I_z}}}{M_z}y

In general the strain is reduced by a factor of {1 - {\nu ^2}}

Edit
So you can see that the change is the insertion a modifying constant into your strain tensor, I will leave you to do this since you haven't provided any notation.
You need to be careful here since my strain is engineering strain, not tensor strain, which is a factor of 1/2 different.

You should also note that the sideways distribution may also depend upon the support conditions.
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Back
Top