Every essay
Nine fields, 313 ideas with a ladder of their own, and 1209 named objects threaded through them. This page is the flat list; the other three are the ones that keep working as it grows. There is also a search.
Equilibrium 47 Structural form 54 Internal forces 56 Sections and stress 53 Stability 51 Deflection 47 Materials 48 Connections 48 Dynamics 47
Everything adds to nothing, and that is the whole of statics
A structure that stays put obeys two statements — the forces on it sum to zero, and so do the moments. Every number in the subject comes out of those two sentences.
The free body is a choice, and choosing it well is the whole skill
Cutting a structure open is not a step in the method. It is the method — and where the cut is made decides whether the answer takes one line or twenty.
Three forces must meet at a point, and a drawing can find it
A body held by exactly three forces has their lines of action concurrent. That is a theorem, it is enough to solve for direction and magnitude, and for a century it was done with a straightedge.
Counting the unknowns, and finding out whether statics can answer
Two equations per joint, one unknown per member, one per restraint. Subtract, and the sign of the answer says whether the structure is a mechanism, solvable, or beyond what equilibrium alone can settle.
Answering one question without solving the rest
A truss of fifty members can be interrogated about one of them. Cut through three, take moments about the point where two of them meet, and the third falls out in a single line.
The load that is spread out, and the force that replaces it
A distributed load can be swapped for a single force at its centroid. The reactions come out identical and the bending moment does not, and knowing which side of the cut the swap is legitimate on is most of the skill.
The equation that is not new, and the three that are
A plane free body yields exactly three independent equations. Most attempts at a fourth are one of the first three wearing different clothes — and on a beam under vertical load, one of the three is already saying nothing.
The count that does not see it
A frame can have exactly as many unknowns as equations and fold up anyway. The count asks whether there are enough equations; it never asks whether they are different from one another.
The triangle that cannot fold, and everything built out of it
A square of pinned bars is a mechanism. A triangle is not, and that single fact is the reason trusses exist and the reason they look the way they do.
The shape that carries itself, and the arch that is its reflection
Hang a chain and it takes the one shape that carries its load in pure tension. Turn the shape upside down and it carries the same load in pure compression. That is what an arch is.
Depth is the cheapest strength there is
Doubling the depth of a truss halves its chord forces without adding a gram of material to the chords. Nothing else in structural design is that cheap, and almost every structure has already spent it.
The polygon that finds the shape
A hanging string under five loads has no smooth curve in it — it has five vertices and six straight segments, and every slope in it is a running sum divided by one number.
The hinge put in on purpose
An arch with two pinned feet cannot be solved by statics. Add a third hinge at the crown — deliberately weakening it — and the whole structure falls out of one moment equation.
The frame that leans, and what stops it
A rectangle of pinned bars folds flat. Make the corners rigid instead of adding a diagonal and it does not — which buys an unobstructed opening and costs bending in every member of it.
The line that must stay inside
A masonry arch does not stand because its shape is right. It stands because some line of compression can be drawn inside the stonework — any one will do, and there are infinitely many to choose from.
The joint that is not a pin
Every truss on this site is analysed as though its joints were frictionless pins. Almost none are. The bending that follows is called secondary, which is a claim about size — and the claim is checkable.
What a cut reveals, and why it was there all along
Cut a beam anywhere and two quantities appear on the face — a shear force and a bending moment. Nothing was applied there. They are what the material was already doing.
The diagram is an integral, and that is why it can be drawn by eye
Load, shear and moment are one function and its two integrals. Once that is seen, the diagrams stop being things to calculate and become things to sketch.
Where to put the supports, which is not at the ends
Moving the supports of a uniformly loaded beam inward by about a fifth of its length halves the worst bending moment. The load has not changed and nor has the beam.
After the first yield, which is not the end
A steel beam whose extreme fibre has reached yield has not failed. It has started forming a hinge, and collapse waits until there are enough hinges to make a mechanism.
The moment over the support, and what it buys
Run a beam over its supports instead of stopping at each one, and the mid-span moment falls by a third while a new moment appears where there was none. Nothing was added but continuity.
The worst place to stand
A bridge is not designed for a load. It is designed for a load that moves, and for every station along it there is a different position of that load that does the most damage.
The moment that will not lie flat
A plane cut exposes three actions. A real cut exposes six, and the fourth of them behaves unlike the others — torsion is resisted by a loop of shear, and one slit down the length of a tube destroys it.
The train that is worse than its heaviest axle
An influence line says where to stand one load. A vehicle is several loads at fixed spacings, and the worst arrangement never puts the heaviest one at the peak.