He has indeed passed away. For a time, his widow was advertising in R/C airplane hobbyist mags for a book McCombs had written on the subject. I tried reaching out to her via the contact info she had listed in the ads, but no response. (The ads were from a number of years before I tried to find...
I'm looking to find a physical copy of McCombs's supplement to Bruhn's Analysis & Design of Flight Vehicle Structures. I'm aware that electronic copies exist and where to find them, but this is for a university library, and don't want something that will have copyright issues. Unfortunately...
Not thrilled about all of a sudden getting a ton of emails for "watched forums". I don't remember watching anything. I get more than enough garbage email during election season in the US, I certainly don't need you all adding to it.
Fixed the font with the [code] tag....
The users manual doesn't go into a ton of detail about the GPST. I've got a programmers manual from 1972, which I'm not particularly adept at deciphering. Haven't tried Siemens help. Honestly, this isn't particularly critical, it's just something I...
I thought the tt tag would do a monospace font. Apparently I thought wrong. I don't see a way to control the font otherwise....
Anyway, this is just a toy model, single cantilevered bar element, I use as an example. It's deliberately set up to show AUTOSPC constraining something that shouldn't...
Ok, so somewhere between the first rev of the data sheet in 1941 and third revision of the data sheet in 1963, the long sides simple, short sides clamped case was adjusted, and agrees with Galambos. And apparently also the all sides clamped case was adjusted as well. This is interesting and...
...C (eq 4.27b) of k = 5.34 + 2.31/r - 3.44/r^2 + 8.39/r^3, with r = a/b, for r > 1. So, at b/a = 0.6, r = a/b = 1.67, I get k = 7.30, or K = 7.30 * pi^2/12(1-0.3^2) = 6.59. Are you sure you're reading Galambos correctly?
Not being able to see your attachment, I've got C&R plotted in Bulson...
Interesting! Is there any chance you could send me a copy? I was able to find a copy at Johns Hopkins, and that agreed with other sources. Perhaps yours is an earlier revision? I don't recall seeing a date or anything on what I was looking at, maybe I should take a closer look.
Depending on the source, the coefficient is sometimes presented with the π^2/12(1-nu^2) factor built in, without that factor built in, sometimes presented as sqrt(k). I'm accounting for that, and the curve in my chart matches where it should be at aspect ratios of 0 (infinitely long) and 1...
I was ready to go with an updated chart. But my boss is concerned that we need a good story to tell on this one.
Thank you, Wil! I'll reach out to them.
Yes. That's how I come to think that the article in the Data Sheets is 02.03.01, because ESDU 71005 notes that it supersedes that. But ESDU 71005 doesn't match my chart, it matches all the other sources.
It's possible the Data Sheets had an error that was corrected in the transition, or maybe...
Ran out of space in the post...
My search for the Data Sheets has turned up nothing online. The US National Forest Service library had a physical copy, and their librarian took a look and said it was incomplete, didn't include 02.03.01, nor was there anything else that looked like flat plate...
I'm on a bit of a scavenger hunt. I've got a chart of shear buckling coefficients vs aspect ratio for unstiffened rectangular flat panels with different boundary conditions (all sides simply supported, all sides clamped, long sides SS/short sides C, and long C/short SS). One of my colleagues...
...to the F set of DOFs, which are split into the internal (O set) and external (T set) DOFs. Then the boundary transformation matrix Got = -Koo^-1 * Kot relates the internal DOFs to the external DOFs. You then use that to write Pt = (Kttbar + Kto * Got) * ut = Ktt * ut, and now you've got a...
...force and the actual force, using the approximate displacement, e = r dot d' / P dot d'.
In the SE creation run, we're finding Got using Koo * Got = Kot, So Got = Koo^-1 * Kot. There's some numerical error in this, too, so let's say that gives us Got'. I suppose you could check your result...
