Euler-Bernoulli vs Timoshenko Beam Theory 

Yo this is pog

watching this as a re-cap just minutes before the exam while pooping in panic.

Excellent. best video on difference between Euler and Timoshenko theory on youtube. plz make more videos, u can charge some fees to make it public , but, please make more videos. Good teachers are very very rare. God bless you.

Very good video my friend! I was never introduced to Timoshenko theory in my mechanical design class, and this is a good starting explanation. :D

Fantastic break down. I read about 20 papers to try to simply figure out this difference and all it took was a sub 5 minute video

I want to know the form difference between the Timoshenko beam theory and Euler-Bernoulli so that your video was helpful for me. Thank you.

Short and very sweet!

Muy buena explicación. Muchas gracias!

enough info for this topic :) . very nice

"Alright that's all I have. Thank you so much for listening" This man is a simple man. I take my hat off for you.

Great video

I think you should show combine diagram of shear and bending.

Step by step video solutions of civil engineering questions

my lecturer took 3 lectures to explain this

Additionally, maybe i don't understand, but is the last picture correct? How can the end be a straight line if you have to account for compression on top and tension at the bottom?

mmm quizás tengo q profundizar más, estoy estudiando vigas de acoplamiento en muros. Me recomiendas algún libro? Excelente video.

at 1:00 (Since there is no transverse loading): by that you mean there is no force parallel to axis? because if you would say otherwise, we have a load which is perpendicular to axis. (Which in my understanding, should be called as transverse loading). Am I missing something?

From what I have read. The reason this theory is necesary, is because in thick and short beams the shear strain energy is greater than normal strain energy caused by bending moments. So deformation caused by shear forces will be more significant than deformations caused by bending moments. This makes sense because thick and short beams have a great flexural rigidity and the bending moments are small compared with shear forces.

rather than a contradiction, i would describe that aspect of the e-b-b theory as an "inconsistency".

can you show me the axis direction (x y z)

Maybe I got something wrong, but as far as i know the neutral axis is defined as the axis which retain perpendicularity AFTER the beam has been deformed, that's why for this particular shape is in the middle, because after the cubes are deformed, only the middle of the cube remains perpendicular. I don't understand why would you define the neutral axis before bending. And shear in a beam under deflection is always present, why would you neglect it?

Do you really think, that the far right edge would stay perpendicular?

What are the backgrounds needed to understand it?

Timoshenko like a Russian name， every professor in univeristy with name ...+sky, is hardcore,