Block and Wedge (all frictionless)

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on a physics problem involving a wedge and a block, both without friction, where the goal is to derive relative accelerations using relative velocities. The user has completed free body diagrams (FBDs) and Newtonian equations of motion but finds the wording of the question confusing, particularly regarding the application of constraints. The statement of relative accelerations is identified as a_(block/table) = a_(block/wedge) + a_(wedge/table), but the user is uncertain if this is derived correctly from relative velocities. Guidance is suggested to revisit the FBDs, noting the forces acting on both the block and the wedge to clarify the problem. Overall, the user seeks clarity on progressing from their current understanding to solve the problem effectively.
RoKe
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
I searched for this problem and could not find satisfactory information or information that applied to my specific concerns.

The wedge of mass M is resting on a horizontal surface. A block of mass m is placed on the wedge and the whole system is released from rest. There is no friction anywhere in the system.

I have the FBDs complete. I have the Newtonian equations of motion in both the x and y components (relative to the table, for an inertial frame) for the wedge and the block.

The question asks, use the concept of relative velocities to derive a statement of relative accelerations, then use that to apply the proper constraint.

Then, the acceleration of the wedge (relative to the table) and the block (relative to the table and the wedge) must be found. I think I can do this once I get the first part done.

Basically the wording of the first part of the question is confusing and I'm not sure where to progress after getting the motion equations.

Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
RoKe said:
The question asks, use the concept of relative velocities to derive a statement of relative accelerations, then use that to apply the proper constraint.
This is the exact wording of the question? I'm not sure what it means by "apply the proper constraint."

What did you get for your statement of relative accelerations?
 
The statement of relative accelerations is a_(block/table) = a_(block/wedge) + a_(wedge/table). Was I supposed to derive this from a similar statement of relative velocity? I don't know what it wants me to do.
 
I don't think that's what they want.

Go back to your FBD. THere should be one for the block and one for the wedge. The block has two forces on it, the wedge has three. The wedge has a net force that will be horizontal. The block has a net force that is angled down the incline (but not the same angle at incline),
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top