What Does Normal to the Reference Surface Mean in Love's Hypothesis?

[perfectz]

Doubt in Love's hypothesis... Please help...

"Normal to the reference surface of the beam remain normal to it and undergo no change in length during deformation"
What does this mean? please help...

 

[Mapes]

"Normal to the reference surface of the beam remain normal to it and undergo no change in length during deformation"
What does this mean? please help...

That's not a sentence as you've written it, so I did some searching. Do you mean "Normals [i.e., normal vectors] to the reference surface of the beam remain normal to it and undergo no change in length during deformation"? It's not a hypothesis, it's an assumption used to simplify elasticity problems. And assumptions, like models, are often strictly wrong but useful.

 

[perfectz]

Ya you Love's assumption. I am extremely sorry pal. I understood first 3 this one I can't... Plz help

 

[perfectz]

Does it mean that deformation is not significant enough to affect the normal?

 

[brewnog]

Not sure I understand (your English is a little muddled!), but how's this:

If you apply a force in order to bend a beam, an assumption is made when you perform your calculations. You assume that the force you apply remains normal to the beam's axis (perpendicular to the length of the beam), and that the beam doesn't change in length under deformation (when it's bent).

 

[Mapes]

It means that transverse shear in the beam is neglected.

 

[FredGarvin]

http://www.efunda.com/formulae/solid_mechanics/composites/comp_laminate.cfm