Neither of the two, I suppose.
What we can derive from the equations of equilibrium:
-from one section of the beam to another one, assuming no distributed or concentrated loads act between the two on the beam:
V=d
M/dz, and of course, in the absence of external forces,
M varies linearly (or is constant) and
V is constant (or zero). Here only the global characteristics
V and
M are meaningful, not the stresses
-from the equilibrium of a section of the beam cut between two sections and a plane parallel to the axis z and orthogonal to the shearing load, we get
VQ/
It (or
PSi/
Ibi as I wrote it above), so that this relationship is a direct consequence of the normal stress due to bending varying linearly over section depth.
Two (possibly) interesting notations for
feaeng1:
-the usual approximation of considering a constant
[τ]yz over a chord leads inevitably to an infinite shear stress at the points on the inside diameter in line with the load; this perhaps explains why this case is normally not treated in the books
![[ponder] [ponder] [ponder]](/data/assets/smilies/ponder.gif)
, but is generally not a problem, as no one is interested to the shear stress elsewhere than at the neutral axis (so
feaeng1, could you tell us why are you so interested by the distribution of shear over the section?)
-the distribution of shear stress for a thin tube is the same as for a rectangle having the same section depth and a width a bit over the double of the thickness (in rethinking to this very profound discovery, can't really see what usage we could do of it...
![[blush] [blush] [blush]](/data/assets/smilies/blush.gif)
)
prex
: Online engineering calculations
: Magnetic brakes and launchers for fun rides
: Air bearing pads