Equilibrium of Rigid Bodies and Two-Force Members!

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 14 ธ.ค. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 17

  • @Liaditoby
    @Liaditoby 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Thankyou so much, send lots of love❤

    • @simple_civil
      @simple_civil  2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Thanks for the support, glad I could help!

  • @simple_civil
    @simple_civil  2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Skip to 2:45 if you wish to only see the problem solving steps, thanks for watching!

  • @dtchouse
    @dtchouse 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Very insightful video, you just got another sub!

  • @josephvillapando3610
    @josephvillapando3610 หลายเดือนก่อน

    how did you get the slope of force CB?

    • @simple_civil
      @simple_civil  หลายเดือนก่อน

      Good question! I just worked with the dimensions I was given. If we treat the bracket as the hypotenuse of a triangle, we have a 1.5m base and 2m height. This is equivalent to the 3 4 5 triangle i draw later in the problem. From there, if you wanted the angle with respect to x, you can do tan-1 (3/4). Hope that helps!

  • @danielvicente6600
    @danielvicente6600 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Good video! Thanks for the help.

    • @simple_civil
      @simple_civil  2 ปีที่แล้ว

      No problem, Glad it helped!

  • @zazamargvelashvili4780
    @zazamargvelashvili4780 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Hello,for c beam 100 mm, length is 1.5 m at 0,75m we have force strut, question is: how many kg can it take at the end of the beam? Thank You

  • @jared_san
    @jared_san 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Why is a 3 and not 1.5?

    • @simple_civil
      @simple_civil  7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Hey! Its a special triangle (also called a 3 4 5 triangle). You can use 1.5, 2 and 2.5, but its just common to write it as 3 4 5 when you have the equivalent relationship. Hope that helps

  • @hafeezamsyar1179
    @hafeezamsyar1179 ปีที่แล้ว

    can you explain how to solve that first equation to get Fb

    • @simple_civil
      @simple_civil  ปีที่แล้ว

      No problem
      As a brief recall of what the equation means, we are taking the equilibrium equation for Moment at A because it removes the Reactions at A (Ax and Ay), leaving the last unknown Fb to solve for.
      Now, since this is a equilibrium of moment equation, we remember that M= F*d (Moment = Force * Distance), so we are doing this for every force and reaction within our member (remembering that there is zero distance between the reactions at A and point A, the logic behind not solving for these in this equation). The formula takes 600N as Negative since it creates a Clockwise rotation with respect to A, and its located 1m from A ( Similar logic for the 800N force as well in the equation). The 900Nm moment is Negative for CW rotation as mentioned at well, but distance is not relevant since it is already in terms of moment for the equation. Lastly Fb: We need the Y component of this force because the x component will create no rotation about A. To do this, we use the special triangle to break down the component of Fb, so Fby is Fb * ( 3/5 ), then we must not forget the Counter clockwise rotation about A (+ sign) and distance from A.
      The rest is easy, bring over the constant values to the other side of the equation (don't forget sign changes), divide by the coefficients of Fb, and BOOM... Fb is solved.
      Hope this helps

  • @Uygʻun-q2c
    @Uygʻun-q2c 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    respect

    • @simple_civil
      @simple_civil  2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Cheers, glad I could help!

  • @luisa-lc1ho
    @luisa-lc1ho 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    thank you!!!

    • @simple_civil
      @simple_civil  2 ปีที่แล้ว

      No problem Luisa, glad I could help