Why is the net torque not exactly zero.

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The net torque measured in the experiment was 0.02 N-m, indicating that it is not exactly zero despite the expectation for equilibrium. Factors contributing to this discrepancy include the meter stick not being perfectly horizontal, potential misalignment of the hangers, and the placement of the supports. The experiment suggests that slight deviations in setup can lead to measurable torque, emphasizing the importance of precision in experimental physics.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of torque and its calculation (Torque = Force x Moment Arm)
  • Familiarity with significant figures in experimental data
  • Basic principles of equilibrium in physics
  • Experience with lab equipment such as force sensors and hangers
NEXT STEPS
  • Investigate the effects of misalignment on torque calculations
  • Learn about the principles of static equilibrium in physics experiments
  • Explore methods for improving measurement accuracy in lab setups
  • Research the impact of support placement on torque generation
USEFUL FOR

Physics students, laboratory technicians, and educators looking to enhance their understanding of torque and experimental precision in mechanics.

snagglepuffin
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


The sum of the net torques is zero even f the numerical result is not. Rather than simply explaining that the net torque is close to zero, justify that your net torque is small, within the context of this experiment.


2. Attached is a pdf of the lab that we had this week. My question is regarding Question 2 on Page 5.


Here is what we got for our measurements.
DATA TABLE 1
Mass (kg) Force (N) Sign of torque Moment Arm (m) Torque (N-m)
Meter stick .1974 -1.93 - .49 -.9457
Hanger 1 .020 -.196 - .66 -.1294
Hanger 2 .0207 -.203 - .98 -.1989
Hanging Mass .0999 -.797 - .66 -.6461
Force sensor no mass 1.98 + .98 1.92
Sum of forces : -1.328N
Sum of torques : 0.02 N-m



The Attempt at a Solution


My lab partner and I were trying to figure out why our measured net torque was not zero, but .02 N-m. We thought that it might have been the use of significant figures, but that did not work. Also, through observation of the setup, we noticed that the meter stick was not hanging perfectly straight, because of the hangers. We thought that there was a torque along the x-axis. Assume that the x-axis runs the length of the meter stick and the y-axis is vertical.

Any other ideas out there why our calculated net torque is not exactly zero?
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
snagglepuffin said:
through observation of the setup, we noticed that the meter stick was not hanging perfectly straight, because of the hangers.
Was there a reason you couldn't adjust the force scale to get the meter stick to be horizontal?

One experiement should have been to only use hangar 2 at the 100 cm end of the meter stick, which would simplify the test and perhaps be used to "calibrate" the test. I'm wondering about the actual net effect of a support or hangar placed at the ends of a meter stick, where each net force could actually act as if it originates somewhat inside the ends of the meter stick. Can the support / hangars be positioned partially beyond the ends of the meter stick in an attempt to get the actual net force to act at almost exactly at the 0 and 100 cm points, although this may not explain why the calculated torque was .02 N m.
 
Last edited:
rcgldr said:
Was there a reason you couldn't adjust the force scale to get the meter stick to be horizontal?

The meter stick was about 1mm off on the horizontal, so overall it was level horizontally.

The hangers themselves would not hold it perfectly vertical. I tried multiple hangers and picked the best ones, but there was still some twisting down the meter stick. If you look at the end of the meter stick and it is perfectly straight, you should only see the (3/8)" x 1" profile. Looking down our meter stick I could see the other end, leading me to believe that there is an unaccounted for torque about the x-axis.

Also, the closest the supports could be to the end of the meter stick was 1cm. Could the fact that there was still mass on the other side of the hanger be where the error is?
 
snagglepuffin said:
Also, the closest the supports could be to the end of the meter stick was 1cm. Could the fact that there was still mass on the other side of the hanger be where the error is?
What happens if you recalculate the table for torques about 0 cm, but with the outer hangers at 1 cm and 99 cm? (In this case the hanger at 1 cm generates a tiny amount of torque).
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
22K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K