Three ways to apply the same force, and one depth to forget the difference
Three ways to apply the same force, and one depth to forget the difference. Three end loads on a member 400 mm deep, all with the same resultant and the same moment: a point load, the same force spread over a fifth of the depth, and the same force split in two. What is plotted is the *difference* between each of them and the beam-theory answer — the self-equilibrating remainder — as a fraction of the mean stress. The point load starts at 20 times it and is under a tenth of it by 0.77 depths; all three are under one per cent by about 1.18. That distance is the licence every figure in this collection is drawn under, and the exact strip eigenvalue agrees with it: 2.106 + 1.125i, whose real part puts one per cent at 1.09 depths and whose imaginary part means the remainder changes sign on the way out, which no statement of the principle mentions.
4 essays call
stress-decay. The drawing above is what it returns with no arguments at all; every
call below passes it something, because a placement that passes nothing draws whichever
member of the family the generator happens to default to rather than the one its essay
argues about.
Where it is called
Changing this generator changes every one of these figures.
How far a wrong load reaches
Every figure in this collection applies a load as a point, a line or a uniform pressure, and no real load is any of those. The licence is Saint-Venant's, it is usually quoted as a principle, and it is really a statement about a wavelength.
The force that arrives along a length
A bolt takes its force at a hole and a weld along a line. A reinforcing bar has no such place — it is a smooth cylinder in a hole of its own shape, and the only thing stopping it sliding out is a stress smeared over its surface. So the force in it is not a number, it is a function of position.
The width nobody drew
Every other member in this collection arrives with a cross-section. A gusset plate does not — it is a piece of steel with a brace bolted to it somewhere in the middle, and no geometry says how much of it is working. The profession's answer is a thirty-degree spread from a 1952 master's thesis, it invents three quarters of the area being checked, and the check it was written for is not the one that governs.
The length a structure was never given
A disturbance applied at one place dies out over a distance, and the distance is not something anybody chose. A beam forgets a badly applied load over its own depth. A beam on the ground forgets a point load over the fourth root of its stiffness against the soil's. A shell forgets a held edge over the square root of the radius times the thickness — a geometric mean of two lengths three orders of magnitude apart, which is neither of them and is not near either.