Particle Equilibrium: Solving for the Minimum Angle in a Roller System

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion focuses on solving a particle equilibrium problem involving three identical smooth rollers, each with a radius of 2.5 ft and weighing 500 lb. The objective is to determine the minimum angle α required to prevent the pile from collapsing, assuming frictionless surfaces. The solution involves balancing forces and moments, leading to the conclusion that the minimum angle α is approximately 10.8933 degrees, derived from the equations of motion and geometric properties of the system.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of particle equilibrium principles
  • Knowledge of forces and moments in static systems
  • Familiarity with trigonometric functions and their applications in physics
  • Ability to solve simultaneous equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of static equilibrium in mechanical systems
  • Learn about the application of trigonometry in solving physics problems
  • Explore advanced topics in mechanics, such as dynamics of rigid bodies
  • Investigate the use of simulation software for analyzing mechanical systems
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for mechanical engineers, physics students, and anyone involved in the analysis of static systems and equilibrium problems.

Artifex
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi

(see attached picture for problem)

"Three identical smooth rollers are positioned in a groove as shown. Knowing that each roller (with radius 2.5 ft) weighs 500 lb, determine the minimum angle [tex]\alpha[/tex] required to make the pile not collapse (all surfaces are assumed frictionless)."

I know this is a particle equilibrium problem. My idea is that since the system is symmetric, we should be able to balance half of the system inorder to get a solution (in fact, I believe we have too, otherwise the balances will yield 0=0). For example, taking the right half of the system, I believe the that the only forces we have to worry about are the N2 pointing left, the N1 pointing up, the two weights, and the N1 normal between the two balls should be ignored. These are the equations I've come up with (though I think the geometic relations are wrong and variable with the value of [tex]\alpha[/tex]), with O being the low point where the two slopes intersect:

[tex]\sum {F_Y} & = & \frac{1}{2}w + w + N_1 \cdot sin(\alpha)=0[/tex]
[tex]\sum {M_O} & = & 2.5 \cdot w \cdot cos(\alpha) + 2.5 \cdot N_1 + N_2 \cdot 2.5 (1 + sin(\alpha))=0[/tex]
[tex]\sum {F_X} & = & N_2 - N_1 \cdot cos(\alpha)=0[/tex]

(sorry, my latex is bad)

and of course, w=-500

Solving those equations, I fiind alpha = -112.8 (deg) (along with several imaginary answers)
Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks
 

Attachments

  • rollers.jpg
    rollers.jpg
    8.3 KB · Views: 569
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't know if you agree with me, but I work this ploblem like this:
First, I work on the roller on top, so--> (N4+N5)sin(60)=mg and N4cos(60)=N5cos(60)---> N4=N5--->2(N5)sin(60)=mg--->N5=mg/(2sin(60))...(1).
Then, I start working with the roller on the right.
N5cos(60)+N2-N1sin(alpha)=0...(2) and N1cos(alpha)-mg-N5sin(60)=0...(3).
Substituting (1) on (3)----> N1cos(alpha)=mg+(1/2)mg=(3/2)mg...(1)*
In equation (2) in order to get a minimum (alpha), N2 must be zero----->
--->N1sin(alpha)=N5cos(60) and from (1)--->N1sin(alpha)=mg/(2tan(60)...(2)*
Finally, dividing (2)* by (1)*---> tan(alpha)=(1/3tan(60))-----> alpha~10.8933...
Due to certain geometrical properties, I used 60 degrees.

I hope this help and forgive me because I don't know how to use Latex wisky40
 
That makes perfect sense. The critical condition that I couldn't come up with was that N2=0. And your solution, being independent of mass or dimension, also makes sense. The work looks solid. Thanks a lot!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K