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),
 
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
Back
Top