|WikiProject Architecture||(Rated Start-class, High-importance)|
|WikiProject Civil engineering||(Rated Start-class, Top-importance)|
The article refers to C-channel sections. I don't know if this is the correct terminology, in the UK we use Parallel Flange Channels (PFCs) or Rolled Steel Channels (RSCs). Is C-channel an American term? Leithp July 8, 2005 12:13 (UTC)
- It's an American term. The American Institute of Steel Construction uses C as the designator for standard channel sizes in its specifications. --Spindustrious 8 July 2005 14:35 (UTC)
- How about just changing the reference to Channel to make the article more universal, which would also tie in with using generic terms like pipe and angle elsewhere. Although we don't use the term pipe either, now I think about it, we call them Circular Hollow Sections (CHS) or Rectangular (RHS) or Square (SHS). Catchy names don't you think?
- One more question, on the bit about trusses being treated as beams, is this right? You certainly might use a truss where a beam might be used but you surely wouldn't treat it as such for design purposes. Am I missing something here? Leithp July 8, 2005 14:50 (UTC)
It might be worth including somewhere in these articles possibly after " Under gravity loads, the top of the beam is under compression while the bottom of the beam is under tension, leaving the middle of the beam relatively stress-free in the middle of the span, with shear stress above the supports." a note it is the reason why (in the UK) Building Regulations specify that holes drilled for cables etc. should be through the centre of the beam.
- If it's one of those prestressed concrete beams then drilling through the middle would probably cut one of the tendons. --Gbleem 04:19, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
Why is an S-beam called an S-beam when it is shaped more like the letter C. --Gbleem 04:20, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
Please explain stiffness and how it relates to I. For instance, my Calculus textbook reads "The stiffness of the beam is a constant times I" (Thomas' Calculus, 11ed, Media Upgrade, p. 1070) in a discussion regarding the use of I-beams versus square or rectangular beams, yet I have not yet been able to find such an equation aside from manipulating the Euler-Bernoulli Beam Equation to fit into the general equation of Stiffness.184.108.40.206 (talk) 21:11, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
Beam theory is not unique to structures
This article is written as though beams are structural elements only found in buildings, roadways and bridges. In machine design, all the elements of beam theory may come into play. For example, in designing a frame for a hydraulic press, the reaction beam against which the cylinder bears while pressing the load sees the same sort of stresses as its counterpart supporting a bridge. The difference is only in the force vector. This article needs some serious attention in that respect.
- I reviewed and agree with your point. I just added a new short paragraph to the lead, noting the usage in automobile and truck frames, machine frames, and other structural and mechanical systems. Did that seem to address it well enough, or do you think we should add some more down in the body areas as well? Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 03:42, 16 December 2011 (UTC)