What causes the change in direction of CD in a truss free body diagram?

  • Thread starter Thread starter wahaj
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Trusses
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on understanding the change in direction of force CD in a truss free body diagram. The user is confused about how the direction switch affects the forces in the truss, particularly leading to a compression force on BD instead of a tensile force. Clarifications are provided on the fundamentals of tension and compression, emphasizing the importance of the direction of applied forces at the ends of the bars. The user is encouraged to revisit basic concepts to grasp the mechanics of the truss better. Ultimately, the key concern remains the repeated change in direction of force CD.
wahaj
Messages
154
Reaction score
2
I missed a class and now I am having some trouble understanding what's going on. I am trying to solve for the components of forces in the truss and whether they exert a compression force or a tensile force. I have attached an image taken from my book and the free body diagrams provided by the book for the truss in question. The question is long and painful but I will really appreciate it if you help me out

*In the diagram forces F and angles θ are the same. There are pin joints at all the points labeled*
The FBD drawn at A looks alright. Fairly easy to to find the direction of the forces in those trusses just be inspecting it. The FBD drawn at C is where things start to get confusing. First of why did the vector CD switch directions? Since CD switched directions as a result so did BC which means that there is now a compression force acting on BD. If CD had remained the same direction as it was in the FBD drawn at A then there would have been a tensile force along BD. Another thing that bothers me is that the effects of the horizontal component of ED was canceled out by CD in the first diagram so why does CD show up again? Pretty much all of the same questions arise again in the last FBD. I forgot to label some parts in the last diagram so let's just leave it be as if I understand the second diagram I am confident I will understand the third one as well.
 

Attachments

  • 20121121_213907.jpg
    20121121_213907.jpg
    14.8 KB · Views: 477
Engineering news on Phys.org
Hello wahaj, I am sorry to hear that you missed a class and I hopw you are now past whatever the reason was.

I am also sorry to tell you that you need to go back a stage and review some fundamentals or you will continue to struggle with this stuff.

To help with this look at the bar CD in my attachment.

It is any old bar in any old framework, not necessarily yours.

Can you draw the arrows to show the forces in the bar when it is subject to (a) tension (b) compression?

Understanding this is vital to understanding your frame.

Are the free body diagrams you have drawn really copies from your book?
I would be suprised, what is that book?
 

Attachments

  • bar1.jpg
    bar1.jpg
    4.6 KB · Views: 493
in your diagram there would be tension on the bar if the forces applied at the end of the bar points away from the center. If they point towards the center then there is a compression force acting on the bar. The textbook that I use the the Hibbeler engineering mechanics, statics. The diagram I showed you is from the exercise that I was trying to do to catch. The FBDs are from the solution manual. Tension and compression are intuitive so I don't have any trouble with those. The big thing I don't understand is why CD changed direction. And the other stuff I said but the big thing is why CD changed directions, twice
 
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