几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量  


返回   几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量 » 三维空间:产品设计或CAX软件使用 » CAD设计 » 产品功能分析
用户名
密码
注册 帮助 会员 日历 银行 搜索 今日新帖 标记论坛为已读


回复
 
主题工具 搜索本主题 显示模式
旧 2009-09-16, 10:37 AM   #1
huangyhg
超级版主
 
huangyhg的头像
 
注册日期: 04-03
帖子: 18592
精华: 36
现金: 249466 标准币
资产: 1080358888 标准币
huangyhg 向着好的方向发展
默认 stress combination

stress combination
here is something i have been arguing with another engineer about and wanted to what others say. it is a simple question: if you have a horizontal force and vertical force acting at the same time on a beam how the stresses should be added? i am saying that the stresses should be simply superimposed (regardless of the shape) but his thoughts were that the resultant force (sq. root of sum of sq’s) should be used to calculate the max. stress. any thoughts?
thanks in advance.
it depends on what you're doing. if you actually want to find the stress at a point, then you'd combine the stresses from the two different loads, use mohr's circle, etc. however, the structural steel codes are set up so you evaluate tension/ compression, evaluate bending, and then evaluate the combination of these, without actually calculating the combined stress at a point.
i'd agree with jstephen. read the design codes and how to assess the stresses, both as principal stresses, individual stress components, and as a combined stress intensity value (which isn't simply the root sum squares). in general you're looking to satisfy the codes against fatigue (if applicable), buckling, and yielding, which are all treated differently and have different stress criterias.
corus
i actually think you'll get the same answer either way. the first thing you would do with a load at some angle is break it into its components (a vertical force and a horizontal force). i see no need to take two forces, make them into one and then break it back into its components.
i would do p/a +or- m/s, making sure to account for any eccentricity of the horizontal (axial)load (if it exists.
let me clarify, i would construct a shear and moment diagram, but as i said above....... i think you will get the same answer either way.
theoretically you should get the same results. however, in practice i thing it would be harder to use the resultant to get results. most equations and analysis procedures are set up to work with components of the resultant, not the resulant that doesn't act along the orthogonal axis.
it probably depends,
for connection, you have to consider the combined effect of both.
for beams, these forces will create shear and bending, so should handle as per code.
for columns, as structuraleit has mentioned.
the op did say this was a beam. i don't think there is a code requirement for analysis. you would have to satisfy code requirements for design of the beam to resist the loads, but the actual stresses would be computed with no code input/requirements (i should make it clear i am assuming this is a steel beam since you likely wouldn't be checking stresses for a concrete beam).
given the axial load, you could also take the secondary moment of the internal axial force times the deflection at that point, but this may not be necessary for what you are doing and also would affect both of your approaches the same way.
i still say you will get the same answer with both approaches.
the caveat i'd apply to superposition is there could be interaction between the loadings that superposition would miss ... consider beam columns.
the advantage that a vector load would have would be bending of an odd shaped section, where the load has to be resolved onto the principal axes for bending; with components you'd have to do this twice.
rb1957-
can you please elaborate? i am not seeing your point. if i were given a beam-column to analyze and it had a single load on it at some angle (theta), the very first this i would do is resolve this load into the vertical and horizontal components (or a load along the axis of the member and perpendicular to the axis of the
as long as the deflections and strains are 'small', then superposition (calculating the stress due to each force separately and adding) will work. not being familiar with these codes, how does the 'answer' obtained this way differ from the answer in the code?
__________________
借用达朗贝尔的名言:前进吧,你会得到信心!
[url="http://www.dimcax.com"]几何尺寸与公差标准[/url]
huangyhg离线中   回复时引用此帖
GDT自动化论坛(仅游客可见)
回复


主题工具 搜索本主题
搜索本主题:

高级搜索
显示模式

发帖规则
不可以发表新主题
不可以回复主题
不可以上传附件
不可以编辑您的帖子

vB 代码开启
[IMG]代码开启
HTML代码关闭

相似的主题
主题 主题发起者 论坛 回复 最后发表
strain driven versus stress driven huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-16 10:22 AM
residual stress in bent steel huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-15 06:22 PM
load combination and allowable stress increase for masonry w huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-10 11:01 AM
calculating reinforcing actual stress huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-07 10:03 PM
asce 7-98 allowable stress increase huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-07 01:18 PM


所有的时间均为北京时间。 现在的时间是 02:35 AM.


于2004年创办,几何尺寸与公差论坛"致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T | GPS研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量"。免责声明:论坛严禁发布色情反动言论及有关违反国家法律法规内容!情节严重者提供其IP,并配合相关部门进行严厉查处,若內容有涉及侵权,请立即联系我们QQ:44671734。注:此论坛须管理员验证方可发帖。
沪ICP备06057009号-2
更多