When do reactive moments appear?

  • Thread starter Thread starter arestes
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Moments
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the concept of reactive moments in the context of journal bearings and structural supports, particularly focusing on when these moments can be considered to be zero. Participants explore the conditions under which moment reactions appear or do not appear in both two-dimensional and three-dimensional scenarios.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the reasoning behind setting reactive moments to zero in certain cases, contrasting it with the treatment of forces in two dimensions.
  • Another participant suggests that reactions occur only when motion is restricted, implying that free rotation does not generate moment reactions.
  • A different viewpoint emphasizes the need to visualize specific situations rather than adhere strictly to rules, noting that simplifications are sometimes made to manage unknowns in problems.
  • One participant highlights that in two-dimensional problems, moment reactions can be set to zero if other supports are present, but expresses confusion about the general applicability of this principle.
  • Another participant asserts that hinges free to rotate do not produce moment reactions, reinforcing the idea that the presence of constraints affects the reactions observed.
  • A later reply challenges the terminology of "set to 0," arguing that it may be misleading since there may be no moment reaction present at all.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the conditions under which reactive moments appear or can be neglected, indicating that the discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific scenarios and examples, but there are limitations in the assumptions made about loads and supports, as well as the definitions of reactions in different contexts.

arestes
Messages
84
Reaction score
4
Hello:
I have some questions regarding what books say about reactive moments when dealing with journal bearings and such.
For example:http://[ATTACH=full]200072[/ATTACH] [url=http://postimage.org/][ATTACH=full]200073[/ATTACH]

What I'm looking for is an explanation as to why the moments can be set to zero. We never do that in 2 dimensions!
I would be grateful for any enlightening thoughts.
Regards
 

Attachments

  • url].jpg
    url].jpg
    47.6 KB · Views: 456
  • supports_in_3d.jpg
    supports_in_3d.jpg
    47.6 KB · Views: 252
Last edited by a moderator:
Engineering news on Phys.org
If you're talking about like in (7) there for example, why would there be a reaction on the shaft if it is free to spin, neglecting friction, if there's no load?
 
Reactions happen when motion is restricted. Imagine all these things are made of spaghetti, what would break and what would stay intact and in which directions?
 
I understand force and moment reactions must appear. ( but I'm *only* talking about moment reactions).

My point is that... I don't see why SOMETIMES they appear (the text says when other supports are present they don't appear). and why this has to be so tricky.
In 2D, if we have two supports, say two hinges, force reactions always are considered and if there's not enough data, it's statically indeterminate. Here we can set *moment* ractions to zero if there are other supports... I don't understand that.

I also understand that if there's no load they shouldn't appear. But in a general structure? sometimes we don't even know if its going to be nonzero.
 
Try to visualize what is going on in the specific situation rather than try to follow some set of rules. Sometimes in 2d problems one support is modeled as a roller to exclude a reaction in the horizontal direction, because certain problems have more unknowns than equations and you'd need to introduce equations for the stiffness of the material to solve it. They simplify it that way before you get to material property stuff.

Look at the difference between 6 and 7. The square shaft is for translational motion and there is no reaction in the y direction. It is free to move back and forth in the y direction and happens to have no reaction in y. The circular shaft is free to rotate about the y-axis and happens to not have any moment reaction about the y axis. Noticing the pattern?
 
If you have hinges free to rotate there are no moment reactions
 
Set to 0 sounds misleading because there is no reaction in the first place
 

Similar threads

When are reactive forces enough to support this body?
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Ball bearing cantilever system with maximal moment of inertia
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
Undergrad What would a calculus author have to say on ##\int r^2dm##?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Undergrad Schiff moment in classical electrostatics
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
2K
Why do extra moment equations not count toward a system of equations?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Gyroscope precession compensation questions
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Maximum bending moment in blade
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
9K
Graduate Why Do Quadcopter Control Equations for Roll and Pitch Exclude Aerodynamic Drag?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Undergrad Moment and the Larmor precession
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Torque/Moment of a bent wrench question
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K