@Air I think it probably suffers in voting because people have to click through the link and then read a longish document. Maybe a short summary in the answer would help? I voted for both it and GlenH7's answer
@setun-90 Ok perfect. so if you have a few options, and know those inputs then I think you would have a good questions. "Given X, is A, B, or C" going to perform better in terms of Z"
@setun-90 No I mean that for someone to do an analysis they would need whatever relevant quantitative information there is. I'm not in aerospace but I would imagine that includes things like service temperature, physical loads, rotational speed, etc. A lot of questions we get are about things that need to be quantitatively analyzed, but the only information we get is qualitative. Defining all of your parameters helps people answer because the problem domain is smaller.
but if you can think through your design, and have a specific question like "with these loads and service conditions with the outside of the plug shaped like this, how can i calculate the required wall thickness?" then people here would have a whole lot to offer.
we get a lot of "would this be possible" or "would this be a good idea" and without doing an extensive engineering analysis, nobody is going to know. That's why companies have engineering departments that work on those questions full time
@setun-90 Yeah, that kind of question would only be fruitful if you explain what you're trying to optimize for. In general novel inventions aren't well recieved here, but if you can make the question specific enough it might work.
@setun-90 I'd say with most of those your best bet is to start doing some research yourself, come up with a basic idea, and then you could ask a question here with the particular options you're trying to pick between and what criteria matter to you. If you want you can run the question by us here before you post it and we might be able to help you tell if it's in scope or if it still needs to be defined better
@setun-90 What kind of engineering concepts do you want to discuss. In general discussions fall into either 'teaching' or 'product development' both of which people usually do professionally not on a volunteer basis, but depending on what it is there may be a placethat's open to an open-ended discussion.
In the welding world, there are 'simple hear' weld joints which are the most common and then 'moment' joints, but I don't know if that's how real engineers analyze them, or just how we classify them based on inaccurate language.
@Air For what it's worth, I know that welded baseplates are often treated as pinned. I don't knwo how much of that is because of the weld and how much is because the plate bends.
I just noticed we have a tag for pneumatic and another one for compressed-air. I don't have enough reputation to suggest them as synonyms, but it may be worth merging them.
@Wasabi Interesting. That's pretty similar to how we do it here, but I've had European clients tell me 5.50 is considered incorrect, it should be 5.5 (with the +/- 0.01 explicit)
@NickAlexeev My understanding is that in metric, the number of decimal places doesn't correlate to tolerance like in US conventions. EG in the US, 5.5in and 5.500 in imply different tolerances, whereas in metric conventions, saying 5.500 mm would just be incorrect. The upshot is that in metric, you should specify your tolerance, you can't count on most reasonable people seeing a three place decimal and knowing the tolerance is +/- .001 like you can in inches
@Jodes My experience is that many engineers learn about these mechanisms 'in the wild' by taking things apart or taking the cover off and seeing how they work. They certainly are some that you won't see often and need to learn from a book or oral tradition, but I don't think many people spend time studying books of (relatively) simple mechanisms.
@Wasabi Yeah, I just take some solace in the fact that someone who can't figure out how to engage an engineer will definitely never be able to engage a contractor to build the formwork and pour the concrete for something so big. I'm more concerned when people ask about removing a column in their basement - something they could easily do themselves.
@Wasabi The good things about posts like that is you can be fairly confident that they will never actually act on their plan in the real world. It's usually idle speculation that drives people to ask these ridiculous questions.
I'm just jealous of whoever has a partner who would appreciate a heart shaped chicago pizza as a token of affection. If anyone like that actually exists.
@hazzey @peterh why did you decide to approve this edit? engineering.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/3918 I thought that the question was just about drafting and if anything would be structural engineering rather than mechanical.
@GlenH7 Eng-tips which I think is our neared benchmark has a bunch of low quality questions like that, and it doesn't seem like a big deterrent. Regular users either completely ignore them or give one or two helpful comments to see if there's a good question hiding behind it.
@jhabbott Yeah, pretty much exclusively imperial for any construction/fabrication field here, so the engineering matches. Science classes tend to use metric or a mixture though.
@PGT More generically, I would call things like that 'perforated bar' there are a number of permutation available in larger sizes, though not always with nice rounded edges.
