Contents

Talk:Tie rod

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

In terms of steering components for automobiles, I believe a tie rod is referred to in the UK , and possibly other countries, as a track rod. Anyone disagree? If not, I propose to put in the alternative name in searches.

Agent0060 14:30, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Can a cable be a tie rod / can a tie rod be a cable? Can this be clarified in the article? 2.29.56.131 (talk) 04:12, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You asked, "Can a cable be a tie rod / can a tie rod be a cable?" The answer is no, but it's a fair question, and the following discussion explains why. It has more to do with language, as a model of reality, than with reality itself. To see why, let's start out, for argument's sake, by going one step further, and talk about "wire" (single-strand) instead of cable (multiple-strand). Consider "wire" versus "rod"—where is the exact dividing line between them? In truth, there is no precise dividing line. First consider the similarities. They are both structural elements that perform in tension. They are both long-aspect-ratio cylinders of essentially homogeneous material, and typically both are made of metal, for example, steel. They both can be made by drawing or extrusion through a die, or rolling between rollers. OK, now consider the conceptual distinction, the connotative difference, between wire and rod. It is the distinction between (1) having enough rigidity to be able to hold its straight-line shape without tensile support (rod) versus (2) not being thus able (wire). In other words, the distinction of whether it can hold its shape "in the free state" (not constrained), as engineers say. But that's only a general connotative concept, not a total model of reality, because a short, stiff piece of large-diameter wire can hold its shape in the free state, and meanwhile a long, small, slender rod may droop a bit. Natural language is an imprecise thing from the viewpoint of creating operational definitions. However, despite this imprecision, it nevertheless easily maintains a certain dogma and clarity in human cognition: wire is not "the same thing", conceptually, as rod. But it's an emic-versus-etic thing, at heart, because there could easily exist a natural language that lacked a distinction between wire and rod. As with many things in language, you can have a spectrum of reality, either modeled with a dichotomous model or not. Can a grayscale spectrum be modeled conceptually as a 3-step, black-gray-white model, in discrete steps? Sure it can, and language does just that sort of reduction with countless pieces of reality, where the reduction is (in truth) simplistic, but yet also necessary to human cognition. In the dichotomous model, it is found upon meditative analysis that the map is not the territory. Questions analogous to your question include: (1) Can pipe and hose be "the same thing"? Both are round, hollow (tubular) fluid conveyances, but hose is conceptually (archetypically) flimsy, whereas pipe is conceptually (archetypically) rigid. But then where does flexible metal or plastic tubing lie on that spectrum? (2) Can ink and paint be "the same thing"? Again, just like above—analyze, and discuss! Similarly, compare tie rodstoguy-wires. — ¾-10 03:35, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've removed File:IMG 4919 London, England - London Eye.JPG "Tie rods supporting the London Eye, England" as it is supported by tensioned cables. 92.41.132.36 (talk) 16:25, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]