Active force of spring on mass (D'alemberts)

  • Thread starter Thread starter buildingblocs
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Force Mass Spring
AI Thread Summary
Eliminating mass m1 from the system affects the equations of motion, as the active forces from the spring remain relevant despite m1 being set to zero. The force of the spring does not depend on the mass, but the equations of motion do, since acceleration is force divided by mass. When m1 is removed, the system's dynamics change, leading to a simplified equation that still incorporates the effects of the spring. The remaining forces must still be considered, as they influence the overall mechanics of the system. Understanding this relationship is crucial for accurately analyzing the motion when m1 is absent.
buildingblocs
Messages
17
Reaction score
1
I am trying to understand the effect that eliminating the mass m1 (m1 = 0) has on the active forces (Fa). I have gone through a scenario where m1 is taken into consideration (refer to uploaded images). The active force on m1 is from the spring and does not have m1 in the expression (Fs1 = (l-r)k), so I did not think that there would be any change. However the set of D'alemberts reduces if m1 is eliminated, so how does active force from the spring effect the remaining equation of motion.

If more info or clearing up is required please do not hesitate to ask. Any help would be much appreciated.

Cheers.
 

Attachments

  • page1.jpg
    page1.jpg
    38.4 KB · Views: 436
  • page2.jpg
    page2.jpg
    36.2 KB · Views: 455
Physics news on Phys.org
Can you write it up there? The attachments are hard to read and their wrong orientation does not help either.

I don't understand what you want to test/show.
The force of the spring at a specific location does not depend on the mass, but the equations of motion certainly do because acceleration is force divided by mass. This also means you cannot expect a physical answer if you set the mass to zero. If you have a spring without mass attached, you still have the mass of the spring (which is often neglected).
 
Figure1.png

figure1.

In figure1, the generalised variables are q and θ, and there are two masses (mass of the spring is neglected). The active forces are Fa1 = Fspring1 (horizontal direction) and Fa2 = Fweight (vertical direction). Therefore it follows that there should be four parts for the equations of motion:
(Fa1 - m1a)∂r1/∂q + (Fa1 - m1a)∂r1/∂θ + (Fa2 - m2a)∂r2/∂q + (Fa2 - m2a)∂r2/∂θ = 0 [eq1]

this is simplified to:
(Fa1 - m1a)∂r1/∂q + (Fa2 - m2a)∂r2/∂q + (Fa2 - m2a)∂r2/∂θ = 0 [eq2]

as ∂r1/∂θ=0

My query is what happens when m1 is eliminated from the system (m1 = 0)
The is now two generalised variable and only one mass:
(Fa2 - m2a)∂r2/∂q + (Fa2 - m2a)∂r2/∂θ = 0
[eq3]


figure2.png

figure 2.

Now consider figure2 (Spring is removed and m1=0)
The equation of motion of system in figure2 is the same as that for eq3, where the spring was included. This intuitively does not appear correct, and I wish to understand how to take into account the effect of spring on the remaining system when m1 =0;
 
If you set m1 to zero, you cannot ignore the forces on r1 - they are still part of the mechanics. The only difference is the exact cancellation of the force from the spring and the horizontal component of the force in the beam (the experiment does not work properly with a string of course)
 
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...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
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?
Back
Top