A falling mass attached to a load/slowing acceleration of gravity.

AI Thread Summary
Attaching a falling mass to a load results in a slower acceleration than the standard 9.8 m/s² due to the load's power requirements. The discussion centers on finding the optimal load that allows the mass to fall as slowly as possible while still generating power. A larger load demands more power, which reduces the mass's acceleration, but if the mass doesn't accelerate at all, it cannot power the load. The challenge lies in balancing the load's power needs with the mass's ability to move. Understanding the relationship between mass, load, and acceleration is crucial for achieving this balance.
qazwsxedc
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
If you attatch a falling mass to a load (electric motor, lightbulb, ect.), the mass accelerates more slowly than 9.8 m/s. I know the power of the falling mass is mgh. My question is how to get the mass to fall as slowly as possible, assuming a fixed mass (changing the power that the load is taking).

It seems to me as if the larger the load is, the more power it requires, the smaller the acceleration of the mass is. But if the mass never accelerated (taking it to an extreme), it wouldn't power the load would it? Where is the balance, the perfect load to make the mass move as slowly as possible?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
qazwsxedc said:
I know the power of the falling mass is mgh.

Check your units.
 

Thread '1:1 versus 2:1 Mechanical Advantage debate'

The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
View full post »

Thread 'Newton's first law?'

Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
View full post »
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
View full post »

Similar threads

Does inertia have anything to do with bodies falling at the same rate?
Replies
14
Views
2K
Testing Newtonian Gravity: Collision of Two Masses
Replies
17
Views
2K
Finding the 'g-force' of a decelerating falling mass.
Replies
1
Views
2K
What is the correct way to calculate the power required to lift a mass?
Replies
25
Views
10K
Relationship between mass and acceleration
Replies
9
Views
3K
Conceptual Force of Gravity Acceleration 2 vs 3 objects
Replies
4
Views
1K
I Work Done/Energy Transferred in One Dimensional Collision
Replies
5
Views
2K
Why do all objects fall with the same acceleration regardless of mass?
Replies
4
Views
4K
Will a feather fly inside a free-falling elevator ?
Replies
7
Views
2K
Can Nonuniform Mass Density Objects Experience Torque in Free Fall?
Replies
21
Views
4K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top