Excellent. best video on difference between Euler and Timoshenko theory on youtube. plz make more videos, u can charge some fees to make it public , but, please make more videos. Good teachers are very very rare. God bless you.
From what I have read. The reason this theory is necesary, is because in thick and short beams the shear strain energy is greater than normal strain energy caused by bending moments. So deformation caused by shear forces will be more significant than deformations caused by bending moments. This makes sense because thick and short beams have a great flexural rigidity and the bending moments are small compared with shear forces.
Additionally, maybe i don't understand, but is the last picture correct? How can the end be a straight line if you have to account for compression on top and tension at the bottom?
Maybe I got something wrong, but as far as i know the neutral axis is defined as the axis which retain perpendicularity AFTER the beam has been deformed, that's why for this particular shape is in the middle, because after the cubes are deformed, only the middle of the cube remains perpendicular. I don't understand why would you define the neutral axis before bending. And shear in a beam under deflection is always present, why would you neglect it?
If I recall correctly, it can be defined before or after any elastic deformation, as the neutral axis should remain at the same place before and after deflection. And I believe the effects of shear on deflection are neglected because they are usually much smaller than the effects of normal stresses, and for most situations they aren't crucial to the integrity of a given part.
at 1:00 (Since there is no transverse loading): by that you mean there is no force parallel to axis? because if you would say otherwise, we have a load which is perpendicular to axis. (Which in my understanding, should be called as transverse loading). Am I missing something?
This comments really old, but this is a good explanation of something you would learn in a strengths of materials class which is normally a second year engineering course.
Yo this is pog
watching this as a re-cap just minutes before the exam while pooping in panic.
Very good video my friend! I was never introduced to Timoshenko theory in my mechanical design class, and this is a good starting explanation. :D
Excellent. best video on difference between Euler and Timoshenko theory on youtube. plz make more videos, u can charge some fees to make it public , but, please make more videos. Good teachers are very very rare. God bless you.
"Alright that's all I have. Thank you so much for listening" This man is a simple man. I take my hat off for you.
Fantastic break down. I read about 20 papers to try to simply figure out this difference and all it took was a sub 5 minute video
From what I have read. The reason this theory is necesary, is because in thick and short beams the shear strain energy is greater than normal strain energy caused by bending moments. So deformation caused by shear forces will be more significant than deformations caused by bending moments.
This makes sense because thick and short beams have a great flexural rigidity and the bending moments are small compared with shear forces.
I want to know the form difference between the Timoshenko beam theory and Euler-Bernoulli so that your video was helpful for me. Thank you.
Muy buena explicación. Muchas gracias!
my lecturer took 3 lectures to explain this
Really
Short and very sweet!
rather than a contradiction, i would describe that aspect of the e-b-b theory as an "inconsistency".
it's neither a contradiction nor an inconsistency. it's a valid semplification if applied conscientiously.
Do you really think, that the far right edge would stay perpendicular?
Additionally, maybe i don't understand, but is the last picture correct? How can the end be a straight line if you have to account for compression on top and tension at the bottom?
Maybe I got something wrong, but as far as i know the neutral axis is defined as the axis which retain perpendicularity AFTER the beam has been deformed, that's why for this particular shape is in the middle, because after the cubes are deformed, only the middle of the cube remains perpendicular. I don't understand why would you define the neutral axis before bending. And shear in a beam under deflection is always present, why would you neglect it?
If I recall correctly, it can be defined before or after any elastic deformation, as the neutral axis should remain at the same place before and after deflection. And I believe the effects of shear on deflection are neglected because they are usually much smaller than the effects of normal stresses, and for most situations they aren't crucial to the integrity of a given part.
can you show me the axis direction (x y z)
x is horizontal, y vertical, z out of plane
at 1:00 (Since there is no transverse loading): by that you mean there is no force parallel to axis? because if you would say otherwise, we have a load which is perpendicular to axis. (Which in my understanding, should be called as transverse loading). Am I missing something?
Great video
mmm quizás tengo q profundizar más, estoy estudiando vigas de acoplamiento en muros. Me recomiendas algún libro? Excelente video.
I think you should show combine diagram of shear and bending.
Step by step video solutions of civil engineering questions
enough info for this topic :) .
very nice
Good
What are the backgrounds needed to understand it?
Bachelor in mechanical engineering
That's what I'm studying, and this stuff seems pretty tame compared to some of the stuff we are learning about.
This explanation was excellent.
This comments really old, but this is a good explanation of something you would learn in a strengths of materials class which is normally a second year engineering course.
first to pass mechanical physics and then to take the first five classes of strenght of materials
Timoshenko like a Russian name， every professor in univeristy with name ...+sky, is hardcore,
Timoshenko was actually Ukranian, and eventually moved to USA and was a professor at Stanford
@@Hardistul yeah so he's a comrade