Atwood's machine problem - inclined plane

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around an Atwood's machine problem involving an inclined plane, focusing on the dynamics of blocks and the effects of friction. Participants explore the relationship between the angle of inclination and the forces acting on the blocks.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the equation for solving the angle \(\theta\) and question the validity of a differential equation presented. They explore isolating \(\sin{\theta}\) and consider the implications of different friction types on the motion of the blocks.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of the problem with various interpretations of the forces involved. Some participants have offered hints and insights into the relationships between the angles and the motion of the blocks, while others are questioning assumptions about the direction of movement and the nature of friction.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the problem does not specify the direction of movement for the blocks, leading to multiple potential angles for equilibrium. There is also a mention of the moderation process for attachments, which may affect the flow of information.

don_anon25
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
Thanks for the input!
 

Attachments

Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi don,

I can't see the attachment for some reason, but if I understand the problem correctly, it looks like you did everything fine. You now simply need to solve for [tex]\theta[/tex] using the equation
[tex]2 \sin{\theta} - 2 \mu_k \cos{\theta} - 1 = 0[/tex].
Unfortunately, the differential equation you have written is not equivalent to the equation you derived from Newton's Laws. This is because the differential has a solution that will be valid for all [tex]\theta[/tex] (and will be exponential) while you are looking for a particular value of [tex]\theta[/tex]. How do you solve for [tex]\theta[/tex] then? Here is hint: try isolating [tex]\sin{\theta}[/tex] and squaring both sides.
 
Physics Monkey said:
Hi don,
I can't see the attachment for some reason,
All attachments go through a moderation queue and must be approved by a mentor beofre they are accessible. This one hasn't been approved just yet.

...but if I understand the problem correctly, it looks like you did everything fine. You now simply need to solve for [tex]\theta[/tex] using the equation
[tex]2 \sin{\theta} - 2 \mu_k \cos{\theta} - 1 = 0[/tex].
Unfortunately, the differential equation you have written is not equivalent to the equation you derived from Newton's Laws. This is because the differential has a solution that will be valid for all [tex]\theta[/tex] (and will be exponential) while you are looking for a particular value of [tex]\theta[/tex]. How do you solve for [tex]\theta[/tex] then? Here is hint: try isolating [tex]\sin{\theta}[/tex] and squaring both sides.
...or write the cosine in terms of the sine, and then do the above.

There's one interesting detail with this problem though. It doesn't say which way the blocks are moving and so, there's no reason for the block on the incline to not be moving up the incline at a constant speed. This will give you another value of the incline angle.

And in fact, any angle between these two limiting cases will have the blocks moving at constant velocity. Think about how that can be true...

PS : This belongs in Introductory Physics.
 
Quite true, Gokul. Hopefully the down angle is sufficient for his problem.

However, I do think there is a slight mistake with your second point. The force of kinetic friction is independent of speed, it doesn't just match the forces the way static friction does. So if one were to replace [tex]\mu_k[/tex] with [tex]\mu_s[/tex] and then solve the "about to move down" and the "about to move up" cases, the block could sit at rest at any angle in between these two extreme cases owing to the fact that static friction will be whatever it takes to just keep the blocks at rest. However, if the block is initially moving, then there are only two angles, the up angle and the down angle, where the force of kinetic friction balances the other forces. What do you think?

BTW: Thanks for Homework Helper nod. What fun.
 
Last edited:
Physics Monkey said:
Quite true, Gokul. Hopefully the down angle is sufficient for his problem.
However, I do think there is a slight mistake with your second point. The force of kinetic friction is independent of speed, it doesn't just match the forces the way static friction does. So if one were to replace [tex]\mu_k[/tex] with [tex]\mu_s[/tex] and then solve the "about to move down" and the "about to move up" cases, the block could sit at rest at any angle in between these two extreme cases owing to the fact that static friction will be whatever it takes to just keep the blocks at rest. However, if the block is initially moving, then there are only two angles, the up angle and the down angle, where the force of kinetic friction balances the other forces. What do you think?
I think it's one of those problems that turns out to reveal more neat stuff than the teacher expected. At angles between the two limiting cases, the blocks would, as you said above, decelerate from the initial velocity... and come to rest (rather than change direction, because at the instant that v=0 they'd experience static friction which will then take over). So, in the steady state, they'd have a constant velocity. :biggrin:

BTW: Thanks for Homework Helper nod.
You bet !
 
Great, glad to see we are in agreement.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
660
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K