Ambrug20
Project Engineer
can somebodt explain where in the last formula the mumber "320" came from. Kp=0.33. Why they put in the formula 320 instead of Kp=0.33
geo_problem.doc
geo_problem.doc
That's full of typos, the formula for Kp is tan^2(45 + phi/2) not tan^2(45 - phi/2), which is the formula for Kacan somebodt explain where in the last formula the mumber "320" came from. Kp=0.33. Why they put in the formula 320 instead of Kp=0.33
thanks, I spend so much time to figure what is going on there.That's full of typos, the formula for Kp is tan^2(45 + phi/2) not tan^2(45 - phi/2), which is the formula for Kacan somebodt explain where in the last formula the mumber "320" came from. Kp=0.33. Why they put in the formula 320 instead of Kp=0.33
The calculated value of Kp is 3, not 0.333 (which is Ka)
In the calculation for the force, the 320 should just be 3.0
Answer is correct
^^^ A good rule of thumb that I recommend - don't spend any more than 20 mins on any given problem! This maximizes your exposure to a breadth of problems while still offering you a fair chance to resolve confusion or errata within the problem.
JR
Enter your email address to join: