×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Back to Basics!!!!

Back to Basics!!!!

Back to Basics!!!!

(OP)
Hi All,

I'm even embarassed to have to ask this. But can someone remind me of how I can calculate the reactions at the 4 corners of the rectangle if the CG of the part is offset as shown? The weight of the part is 10 lbs. If the CG is at the center, then we know the reactions should be 10/4 = 2.5 lbs at each corner. But since it's offset, I'm kinda stumped.

I know I have to sum up values in x and y direction from the original CG but I just can't seem to remember everything.

Thanks for all the help in advance!

RE: Back to Basics!!!!

Sum of forces, sum of moments = 0, assuming everything is static.

RE: Back to Basics!!!!

The reason you can't solve it is that it is statically indeterminate.

If you make the correct additional assumptions then you will be able solve it.

Cheers

Greg Locock

SIG:Please see FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

RE: Back to Basics!!!!

well you can always do what we do ... assume (and don't tell me the joke about "assume", i've heard it).

reidh is right (so too is greg  in an absolute way).

assuming you don't know what sum of forces and moments means ('cause it is basic) you've got four unknowns and only three equations (which is why it is redundant).  assume your part is rigid (and so remains a plane).  a simple way is to assume that each reaction is inversely proportional to the distance for the load CG (the closest one is going to see the highest load).

RE: Back to Basics!!!!

(OP)
reidh, Greglocock, rb1957,

Thank you so much guys! A light bulb just turned on!

Cheers!
CSCPE24

RE: Back to Basics!!!!

quote"rb1957 (Aerospace)      
9 Feb 08 7:41
well you can always do what we do ... assume (and don't tell me the joke about "assume", i've heard it).

reidh is right (so too is greg  in an absolute way).

assuming you don't know what sum of forces and moments means ('cause it is basic) you've got four unknowns and only three equations (which is why it is redundant).  assume your part is rigid (and so remains a plane).  a simple way is to assume that each reaction is inversely proportional to the distance for the load CG (the closest one is going to see the highest load)."

You make the assumptions that each support is equally  rigid and the plate does not distort under the load.

In general there are problems with these assumptions, particularly the rigidity of the plate.
 

 



    


    

RE: Back to Basics!!!!

Careful Zekeman, your in danger of invalidating 95% of the aircraft flying about today!!

RE: Back to Basics!!!!

40818,
Show me where. I would be happy to learn.

RE: Back to Basics!!!!

"assume your part is rigid (and so remains a plane).  a simple way is to assume that each reaction is inversely proportional to the distance for the load CG (the closest one is going to see the highest load)."

Suppose you have a square plate supported at each corner.  You apply equal loads at two diagonal corners.  The CG is then at the center of the plate.  All four supports are equally distant from the center of the plate.  Thus the reaction is the same at each corner per this method.

RE: Back to Basics!!!!

Or, indeed there could be no force at two of the corners.

Hence demonstrating the problem.

Cheers

Greg Locock

SIG:Please see FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

RE: Back to Basics!!!!

JStephen,
if the CG of th eload is over the cg of the plate, yeah, i'd approximate the reactions (based on the assumptions of equal stiffness and rigid plate) as 4 equal loads in the corners.

the +ve i'd take from greg's comment, is that yes, if two of the supports were ineffective, then two (diagonal ones) would see 1/2 the applid load ... so to be safe you could work to this instead; myself, i'd consider this overly conservative.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources