How Much Work to Stand Up a Telephone Pole?

  • Thread starter armis
  • Start date
In summary: If it is not symmetric, then you would need to use the parallel axis theorem to calculate the moment of inertia about the hinge. However, this is not necessary for solving the problem. In summary, the work needed to reposition the 8m and 200kg telephone post vertically can be found by integrating -\tau d\theta, where \tau is the torque on the rod due to its weight. The torque can be calculated using the formula (xF_{y} - yF_{x})\Delta \theta, where F_x and F_y are the components of force acting on the rod. The force acts effectively at the center of mass, which is the middle of the rod if it is uniform. If it is not
  • #1
armis
103
0

Homework Statement


An 8m and 200kg telephone post is laying on the ground. What work one needs to do to reposition the post vertically?

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


:cry:
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Umm, a telephone-post maintenance worker's job?
Are you asking about the amount of work to be done?
 
  • #3
Oh sorry, I meant work :uhh:
 
  • #4
Okay any thoughts about how you want to go about solving this problem? To simplify, assume that the post's mass is uniformly distributed. Where is its centre of mass?
 
  • #5
If the mass is uniformly distributed then the center of the mass is in the center. Thus I need to lift the center by half of the length of the pole [tex] A = mgl/2 = 8 kJ [/tex]
thanks!

Now what about a numerical way to solve this? I was wondering about integrating somehow using the moment of force or something of the kind
 
  • #6
What do you mean numerical method? You can find the centre of mass if required by integration, but other than that I don't see what else you should do.
 
  • #7
Well if there would be a force acting on one end of the pole then I thought I could write and integral of some sorts and find out what work is done by the force to place the pole vertically
 
  • #8
You can integrate [tex] - \tau d\theta [/tex], where [tex] \tau [/tex] is the torque on the rod due to its weight.
 
  • #9
Thanks dx

Any book which explains torgue in detail? I imagine all on classical mechanics must have an explanation, just tell me
 
  • #10
Why even bother with torque?

If you lift this log the 4 requisite meters and put in a magical frictionless bearing in the center, every orientation of the log has equal potential energy. So isn't the solution the gravitational potential of the center of mass at 4 meters?

Any solution involving torque would include the inertia of the pole about some hinge, which, although not unnecessarily complicated, is far more complicated than the gravitational potential formula.
 
Last edited:
  • #11
calef said:
Why even bother with torque?

If you lift this log the 4 requisite meters and put in a magical frictionless bearing in the center, every orientation of the log has equal potential energy. So isn't the solution the gravitational potential of the center of mass at 4 meters?

Any solution involving torque would include the inertia of the pole about some hinge, which, although not unnecessarily complicated, is far more complicated than the gravitational potential formula.
Yep, we actually already did that. Read the previous posts

I wanted to involve torgue that's why I asked how to do it

thanks
 
  • #12
armis said:
Thanks dx

Any book which explains torgue in detail? I imagine all on classical mechanics must have an explanation, just tell me

Torque is basically the rotational equivalent of force. For example, you know that the work done by a force [tex] F [/tex] in moving an object a distance [tex] \Delta x [/tex] is

[tex] F\Delta{x} [/tex].

Now consider some particle on the plane with a force [tex] (F_x, F_y) [/tex] on it. It you now rotate the particle about the origin by and angle [tex] \Delta \theta [/tex], the work done on it can be shown to be

[tex](xF_{y} - yF_{x})\Delta \theta[/tex].

So this strange combination [tex] xF_{y} - yF_{x} [/tex] is the torque, which is also the vector cross product of (x,y) and
[tex] (F_x, F_y) [/tex]. This can also be written [tex] |r||F|sin\theta [/tex] where [tex] \theta [/tex] is the angle between
r and F.

In the case of your problem, the torque is [tex] - \frac{l}{2} mg cos\theta [/tex] where [tex] \theta [/tex] is the angle between the ground and the rod. If you integrate minus this from 0 to pi/2, you get the answer.
 
Last edited:
  • #13
dx said:
Now consider some particle on the plane with a force [tex] (F_x, F_y) [/tex] on it. It you now rotate the particle about the origin by and angle [tex] \Delta \theta [/tex], the work done on it can be shown to be
[tex](xF_{y} - yF_{x})\Delta \theta[/tex].

How can it shown to be [tex](xF_{y} - yF_{x})\Delta \theta[/tex] ?

dx said:
In the case of your problem, the torque is [tex] - \frac{l}{2} mg cos\theta [/tex] where [tex] \theta [/tex] is the angle between the ground and the rod. If you integrate minus this from 0 to pi/2, you get the answer.

why is it l/2 if the force is acting at the end of the pole?Is it because of the mass distribution?If it wouldn't be symmetric, then what?

thanks
 
  • #14
armis said:
How can it shown to be [tex](xF_{y} - yF_{x})\Delta \theta[/tex] ?
Displace the particle by a small angle [tex] \Delta \theta [/tex], and the find the small displacements in the x and y coordinates in terms of this. If these are [tex] \Delta x [/tex] and [tex] \Delta y [/tex], then the work will be [tex] F_{x} \Delta{x} + F_{y} \Delta{y} [/tex].
armis said:
why is it l/2 if the force is acting at the end of the pole?Is it because of the mass distribution?If it wouldn't be symmetric, then what?

thanks

No, the force acts effectively at the center of mass, which is the middle of the rod if it is uniform.
 

1. What does "as easy as it can get" mean?

"As easy as it can get" is a phrase that means something is extremely simple or straightforward, with no additional effort or complications required.

2. Can you give an example of something that is "as easy as it can get"?

One example could be using a microwave to heat up food. Simply place the food in the microwave, set the desired time, and press start - it doesn't get any easier than that!

3. Is "as easy as it can get" subjective or objective?

The phrase can be both subjective and objective, depending on the context. Something that is easy for one person may not be easy for another, making it subjective. However, if a task is universally recognized as simple and straightforward, it can be considered objective.

4. How does the phrase "as easy as it can get" relate to science?

In science, the phrase can be used to describe a process or experiment that is designed to be as simple and efficient as possible. Scientists often strive to make their methods and procedures as easy as they can get in order to reduce the potential for errors and increase the reliability of their results.

5. Is there anything that is truly "as easy as it can get"?

While there may be some tasks or processes that are considered very simple and straightforward, it is unlikely that anything can be considered truly "as easy as it can get." There is always room for improvement and simplification, and what may seem easy now may become even easier in the future with advancements in technology and knowledge.

Similar threads

  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
10K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
11
Views
895
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
966
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
14
Views
1K
Back
Top