Search results for query: *

Jstephen has pretty much answered it. The displacement aligns with the applied force P because, with equally spaced rods, the perpendicular (sideways) force components cancel out. The 4-rod case is easy to understand intuitively, as each spoke has a directly opposing one, so their sideways...

Ahh, but they’re building a greater amount less than they otherwise could have, and this saving more than makes up for the actual increase.

It’s wild that the whole thing tore off. Maybe it had a defect already. Seems wierd that all the relative flimsy parts stayed intact.

What sort of loads are you talking? A few pounds? Or something serious. Why can’t you screw through it to something solid?

Agree. What else are we here for? Sharing knitting tips?

What’s going on that you have 2000kN through one anchor?

6” is nothing. It’s too much when the concrete can’t get through.

I think the tail will show signs of being hit by the rotor. The rotor was probably already damaged, maybe from mast bumping or something else that broke, and wasn’t properly held in place. It likely hit the tail, which then broke off. With the helicopter further imbalanced by the loss of the...

Sure, it predicts the most likely answer, but to do that effectively, it has to build internal structure that reflects the underlying relationships in the problem. That’s the part the “it just predicts the next token” criticism always glosses over. It’s not random guessing, it’s generalisation...

What exactly do you think “reasoning” is? What is it that humans are supposedly doing, that LLMs are not? What’s the actual distinction you’re drawing?

Saying LLMs “do no reasoning” isn’t accurate. They don’t use simple logical operations, but they consistently handle tasks that clearly require what we’d call reasoning in any other context, e.g. logic problems, multi-step calculations, complex code, passing the medical exams. It’s not doing it...

No way. There’s nothing to restrain them when they bow. If they want slender then use metal posts.

I’d use hangers too, ones with nail holes full depth of the hanger, not just at the top. That way you stitch across the notch. Hammer in packers between the dark wood and the light wood., that way you can mobilise both.

How much it can spread depends on the footing and wall's strength and stiffness. If it is stiff and strong enough to dilute the bearing pressures then you are fine. If the wall is continous the wall loads can redistribute elsewhere anyway...

To me, this looks like double dipping. (Assuming the wall is still in service). Your 900 lbs has already caused some settlement - and another 2000 lbs will cause more settlement - more than 2000 lbs would have. Allowable bearing capacities aren’t about ultimate “capacity” — they’re about...

I understand why some want it rebuilt — they want it done as per the drawing, fair enough. But I don’t see why it’s surprising that other engineers might not be as concerned.

It’s not the prettiest, but it doesn’t look like it’s going anywhere. I’m more concerned by the pretty buildings that fall apart.

What’s driving this? Why not normal purlin bracing?

Agree. It knows its own capacity far more accurately than you ever will.

It looks like there might be a gap between the joist and the flooring too? You can end up with that annoying squeaky soft spot.