Talk:Bending

message: A couple of comments:
* The stress maxima are opposite but not allways equal (non-symmetrical sections)
* I don't understand the last sentence: "Because of this area with no stress and the adjacent areas with low stress, bending is not a particularly efficient..." From my point of view that is simply the reason to use I-profiles, truss girders, etc.
--Nk 15:26, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: A couple of comments from [[User:Nk|Nk]]

message: Assuming it only undergoing elastic bending, what is the general shape of a bending beam? Arc, Bezier curve, catenary, parabola, or none of the above? I don't know, but those seem four likely candidates... I don't think it's an arc, and catenary seems the most likely. Timeroot (talk) 14:46, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It depends on how the ends are constrained. That's all I would know...it's a good question. Wizard191 (talk) 16:27, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Catenary works if the load is evenly distributed across a beam that is fixed at both ends (I think), though you would only see it in items with very low flexural rigidity (i.e., rope). I've never spent much time thinking about what the shape was called for different solutions. One commonly thought-of shape, though, is of a beam (like a simplified diving board) that is pinned at one end and loaded by some mass at the other. There's a fourth-order differential equation commonly known as the plate equation, which actually isn't on this page (I should add it) that can be used to describe any flexural situation; it might be useful to solve it for a variety of situations that you think may give the characteristic shapes that you're looking for. Awickert (talk) 16:55, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I was considering a beam, slightly bent, being compressed from either side, where the ends can rotate, but not move. I guess you could say this is a beam, with both ends fixed, with a force being applied from each side. Specifically, I had just been wondering what shape beams take when they buckle, if that's of any help. And thanks for the fast replies... Timeroot (talk) 16:14, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Curvature 

message: In the section on Euler-Bernoulli, it says:
Compressive and tensile forces develop in the direction of the beam axis under bending loads. These forces induce stresses  on the beam. The maximum compressive stress is found at the uppermost edge of the beam while the maximum tensile stress is located at the lower edge of the beam.
Unfortunately, the direction of bending is not mentioned. Which part of the beam is considered "up"? This is confusing for me, and perhaps I have misunderstood it, but intuitively, assuming x the beam axis and y the bending axis, I would expect tensile stress to be on the side above the center of the beam (y+) and compressive below the center of the beam (y-). This image (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Poutre_rayon_courbure.svg) and this other article (Area_moment_of_inertia) seem to suggest the same. Maybe we should change the wording to specify the direction of bending? Unfortunately I am still learning, so I wouldn't dare -- I need to understand it first :) --Rhombus (talk) 09:53, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Compression and tension relative to direction of bending axis 

message: In the section "Timoshenko bending theory", the rotation of the normal is calculated: []
Is this correct? shoudn`t it be  dw / dx insted of d2w / dx2 ?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Etilev (talk • contribs) 12:46, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem? 

message: In the external links section there is currently a link to a page "http://www.engineersedge.com/beam_calc_menu.shtml" with a few tools for calculating beam stresses with limited functionality. Further to this I would like to link a shareware tool which can do this for any arbitrary beam cross-section assembly with any combination of materials and plot the stress/strain contours across the entire section for any applied bending. I think this would be useful for anyone coming to this wikipage looking to increase their understanding of basic engineering beam theory, especially college engineering students whom I had in mind when I wrote this tool. I have had this link removed already and I am trying to understand exactly what the issue with this type of external link is, because I see similar links at many pages related to engineering topics like this.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.171.171.189 (talk) 19:42, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS is not a valid argument to make. There are many messed up links and articles in WP, but that doesn't give a license to add more. As mentioned by other editors to you earlier, as per WP:ELNO links that are not really recognized by notable people are discouraged. A m i t  웃   20:18, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  See also WP:SPS.   Apuldram (talk) 22:52, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

text: No. Wikipedia is not the place to publish your own work. A shareware distributor doesn't count as an independent publisher.  Congratulations on your award. However it doesn't alter the situation here. Apuldram (talk) 09:20, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links to Beam Bending Stress/Strain Calculators 

message: I removed the word "isotropic" from the discussion of the Euler equation because there is no need for the beam to be fully isotropic. The Euler equation works just fine for orthotropic beams as it does for isotropic beams. I added the word "straight" because the Euler equation does in fact rely on a beam that is originally straight (or only slightly curved). As a fix, I'll change "iso" to "ortho", and add "straight." Hermanoere (talk) 17:37, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Isotropy 

message: I reverted the edits by Mandloiabhishek554, who inserted multiple additions of and cantilever, showing lack of understanding that a cantilever is a type of beam. Among other errors Mandloiabhishek554 wrote "In a horizontal cantilevered beam supported at the ends", showing ignorance that a cantilever is not supported at the ends.
My reversion was undone without explanation by 115.249.130.57, who has already received three recent warnings for vandalism.
I have restored the position before the edit by Mandloiabhishek554. Apuldram (talk) 17:59, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Addition of 'and cantilever' 

message: In the Euler–Bernoulli bending theory
D is undefined. 
There are other undefined terms in this article that kept me from learning what this is. I don't remember the other(s), as I'm frustrated now. I'm sure I'm not the only one who came away from this irritated and didn't' learn.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.20.1.177 (talk) 12:31, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  undefined terms