I Can free body diagrams be used if friction at pivot is not negligible?

Click For Summary
Free body diagrams can be used in dynamic systems with non-negligible friction at rotational pivots, as friction is treated as an additional force. Incorporating friction into the equations of motion involves considering both torque and force at the pivot. However, this can lead to complexities, potentially resulting in indeterminate solutions due to multiple statically balanced force and moment configurations. The assumption of frictionless pivots is often employed for simplification to achieve unique results. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for accurate modeling in mechanical systems.
macardoso
Messages
4
Reaction score
1
TL;DR
See title?
Are we allowed to use free body diagrams in dynamic systems where there is non-negligible friction in say the rotational pivot between two linkages? If so, how to incorporate friction into the equations of motion? If not, what method allows friction to be accounted for?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
macardoso said:
Are we allowed to use free body diagrams in dynamic systems where there is non-negligible friction in say the rotational pivot between two linkages?
Sure, it's just another force. It is a bit tricky at a rotational pivot because there will be a torque as well as a force, but if you're comfortable working with torques around an idealized frictionless pivot you'll be able to introduce the effects of friction naturally.
 
  • Like
Likes macardoso and jrmichler
Sounds good, I'll work on this on my own, and I might post back for clarification on my specific case in the future. Thanks!
 
Note however that it's likely (or at least possible) that you'll end up with an indeterminate solution, as there could easily be more than one statically balanced set of forces and moments that could result in the final situation. Frictionless pivots are often a simplifying assumption that is necessary to achieve a single unique result.
 
Thread 'The rocket equation, one more time'
I already posted a similar thread a while ago, but this time I want to focus exclusively on one single point that is still not clear to me. I just came across this problem again in Modern Classical Mechanics by Helliwell and Sahakian. Their setup is exactly identical to the one that Taylor uses in Classical Mechanics: a rocket has mass m and velocity v at time t. At time ##t+\Delta t## it has (according to the textbooks) velocity ##v + \Delta v## and mass ##m+\Delta m##. Why not ##m -...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K