Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- Acknowledgements
- Author’s Note
- Part I Simple Structures
- Part II Truss Frameworks
- Part III Beams and Frames: Character
- Part IV Beams and Frames: Analysis
- Part V Design Choices
- 13 Bending vs Stretching
- 14 Cross-Sectional Stiffness
- 15 Cross-Sectional Strength
- 16 Back of the Envelope: Beam Design by Lower Bound
- 17 The Third Dimension
- Part VI Deliberately Deformed
- Further Reading
- Index
13 - Bending vs Stretching
from Part V - Design Choices
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 January 2022
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- Acknowledgements
- Author’s Note
- Part I Simple Structures
- Part II Truss Frameworks
- Part III Beams and Frames: Character
- Part IV Beams and Frames: Analysis
- Part V Design Choices
- 13 Bending vs Stretching
- 14 Cross-Sectional Stiffness
- 15 Cross-Sectional Strength
- 16 Back of the Envelope: Beam Design by Lower Bound
- 17 The Third Dimension
- Part VI Deliberately Deformed
- Further Reading
- Index
Summary
Most truss frameworks have almost rigid joints in practice; yet, they are often treated analytically as being pin-jointed. Such a dichotomy is tackled by directly solving for the case of a truss beam with built-in joints and then comparing its response to the pin-jointed case. The two responses are shown to converge when the beam members become very slender, thereby validating the pin-jointed assumption.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Solving Problems of Simple Structural Mechanics , pp. 105 - 110Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2022