To compute the reactions and draw the shear and moment curves for a beam, we need to know the external loads acting on the beam, the geometry of the beam, and the boundary conditions.
Once we have this information, we can use the equations of statics and mechanics of materials to determine the reactions, shear forces, and bending moments at different points along the beam.
To compute the reactions, we use the equations of statics, which state that the sum of forces and moments acting on a system must be equal to zero.
Once we have determined the reactions, we can use the equations of equilibrium to find the shear forces and bending moments at different points along the beam.
The shear force is the sum of the forces acting on one side of a cut in the beam, while the bending moment is the sum of the moments acting on one side of the cut.
We can then draw the shear and moment curves using these values, which show how the shear force and bending moment vary along the length of the beam.
The EI being constant implies that the beam has constant flexural rigidity, which is the product of the modulus of elasticity E and the moment of inertia I.
For more questions like Force click the link below:
https://brainly.com/question/13191643
#SPJ11
what is the difference between an argument that is valid and one that is invalid? construct an example each.
An argument is said to be valid when its conclusion follows logically from its premises. In other words, if the premises are true, then the conclusion must also be true.
On the other hand, an argument is said to be invalid when its conclusion does not follow logically from its premises. This means that even if the premises are true, the conclusion may not necessarily be true.
For example, consider the following argument:
Premise 1: All cats have tails.
Premise 2: Tom is a cat.
Conclusion: Therefore, Tom has a tail.
This argument is valid because if we accept the premises as true, then the conclusion logically follows. However, consider the following argument:
Premise 1: All dogs have tails.
Premise 2: Tom is a cat.
Conclusion: Therefore, Tom has a tail.
This argument is invalid because even though the premises may be true, the conclusion does not logically follow from them. In this case, the fact that all dogs have tails does not necessarily mean that all cats have tails, so we cannot use this premise to support the conclusion.
To know more about argument visit:
https://brainly.com/question/27100677
#SPJ11