Great video. I find your content extremely good and the breakdown of the analysis and solution is very clear and easy to follow. Keep up the good work!
This might be late but for anyone else wondering: You follow the exact same steps but keep L as an unknown. Your answer to the integral will be in terms of L, and since you have the deflection you'll be able to solve for L. You'll have multiple solutions to the equation but you take the one most applicable to your situation.
Why do professors bother to teach Castigliano's theorem when we can just add up the individual deflections that are found in tables (M*L^2/(2EI) + qL^4/(8EI) + PL^3/(3EI) ).? Is there some advantage to using Castigliano's?
You may not always have access to tables, or the problem might be a bit too weird for the tables that you do have access to. Castigliano's theorem isn't the only alternative to tables, like for example you could use the moment area method which is often a good alternative too for statically determinant beams. The thing about structural analysis is there's many different methods available to solve any given problem, just some are faster than others and you will learn over time to recognize by inspection which method would be the most efficient to use. Even if you take a look at my full structural analysis course here: engineer4free.com/structural-analysis you'll notice that it's just a collection of methods and I often solve the exact same problems with the different methods. Cheers, hope that provides some insight.
Great video. I find your content extremely good and the breakdown of the analysis and solution is very clear and easy to follow. Keep up the good work!
Thanks for the feedback Steven, glad to hear it!! 🙂
wow!! you literally made this so easy to understand!!
thanks....you help me a lot than my lecturer...thumbs up
Glad I can help 🙂🙂
Thank you so much, finally getting this 👏🏾
What about if they’ve not given length but have asked for minimum length cantilever can be? Also given is max allowable deflection?
Should be able to work the problem backwards, no?
This might be late but for anyone else wondering: You follow the exact same steps but keep L as an unknown. Your answer to the integral will be in terms of L, and since you have the deflection you'll be able to solve for L. You'll have multiple solutions to the equation but you take the one most applicable to your situation.
Why do professors bother to teach Castigliano's theorem when we can just add up the individual deflections that are found in tables (M*L^2/(2EI) + qL^4/(8EI) + PL^3/(3EI) ).? Is there some advantage to using Castigliano's?
You may not always have access to tables, or the problem might be a bit too weird for the tables that you do have access to. Castigliano's theorem isn't the only alternative to tables, like for example you could use the moment area method which is often a good alternative too for statically determinant beams. The thing about structural analysis is there's many different methods available to solve any given problem, just some are faster than others and you will learn over time to recognize by inspection which method would be the most efficient to use. Even if you take a look at my full structural analysis course here: engineer4free.com/structural-analysis you'll notice that it's just a collection of methods and I often solve the exact same problems with the different methods. Cheers, hope that provides some insight.
when you get to advanced solids it will be a lot more useful as you can use it to solve staticly inderteminant problems
Thank u
Thanks!!
You're welcome Rayan!!
How to provide x = 2m....?? Pls ans
thx a lot !!
You're welcome!!
You’re not too good at teaching...
becoz u r awesome at teaching .......and improving countinously👍👍👍
He's better than my professor!
...said no one ever?