Calculating tension in a wire holding beam against wall

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the tension in a wire supporting a beam with a mass at its end. The user initially approaches the problem using trigonometry, calculating the tension as 400N based on the sine of the angle. However, the correct method involves taking moments about the hinge, leading to the equation T sin(30) * 0.5 = 200 * 0.5. This method accounts for the vertical force at the hinge, which is crucial for accurate calculations. The user acknowledges this clarification and recognizes the importance of considering moments in such problems.
mashedpotato
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi, this is my first forum post - sorry if I'm in the wrong place, or I've done something wrong!

Homework Statement


Here goes: There is a beam of 0.5m length hinged to a wall at a right angle with 200N mass at the end of the beam. This is supported by a wire T at angle 30°. The question asks to find tension in T.
It seems I can answer the question correctly, however, looking at the solutions, I do not understand why an answer was obtained in such a way...

Homework Equations


Turning Moment = force x distance.

The Attempt at a Solution


Ok, so I made the triangle into a trigonometry problem. Opposite = wall, Adjacent = beam and Hypotenuse = Wire / Tension.
Opp = 200N, I want to find Hyp ∴ Hyp = 200 / sin(30) = 400N. This answer is actually correct, but the answers use this as a solution:
T sin(30) x 0.5 = 200 x 0.5

If someone could please help, I would be extremely grateful, as this question has been frustrating me for some time.
mashedpotato.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ok, sorry for this post but I *think* I've found the solution. Please do correct me if I'm wrong.

So, technically:
Hyp (T or Tension) = 200 / sin(30)
sin(30) * T = 200

But the answer uses: T sin(30) * 0.5 = 200 * 0.5 which is the same as saying sin(30) * T = 200

Thanks & Best Regards,
mashedpotato
 
mashedpotato said:
But the answer uses: T sin(30) * 0.5 = 200 * 0.5
That solution is taking moments about the hinge where the beam meets the wall, whereas your method looked at vertical components of forces.
Your method is unsafe because you have effectively assumed there is no vertical force from the hinge. That happens to be true in this case, but if you move the point of attachment of wire to beam to somewhere else along the beam it will not be, and the book method succeeds while yours fails.
 
  • Like
Likes David Lewis
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
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...
Back
Top