Consider the equilibrium situation on the picture attached. The wire

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the equilibrium of a rod supported by a wire and attached to an axle in a wall, with a mass suspended from it. Participants explore the conditions necessary for equilibrium, considering the roles of forces, torques, and the potential need for friction at the wall.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether equilibrium is possible without friction, suggesting that the vertical force component from the wire must equal the weight of the mass, which could create a torque imbalance.
  • Another participant emphasizes the need for the moments of forces about any point to be zero for equilibrium, and discusses the intersection of force lines as a condition for balance.
  • Some participants propose that friction or a fixed attachment of the rod to the wall is necessary for equilibrium, as the forces must pass through a common point to avoid a turning effect.
  • There is a discussion about the meaning of "line of action" and whether it refers to the direction of the forces involved.
  • One participant suggests that if the rod is horizontal, both horizontal and vertical components of the force at the wall are required for equilibrium, implying that without friction, the rod cannot remain in equilibrium.
  • Another participant notes that the rod could be in equilibrium without friction if it is sloping downwards, indicating a different configuration that might allow for balance.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity of friction for equilibrium, with some arguing it is essential while others suggest alternative configurations might allow for equilibrium without it. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the specific conditions required for equilibrium in this scenario.

Contextual Notes

Participants have not fully defined the assumptions regarding the forces involved, particularly the nature of the force at the wall and the role of friction. The discussion also reflects varying levels of familiarity with the terminology used in physics.

aaaa202
Messages
1,144
Reaction score
2
Consider the equilibrium situation on the picture attached.
The wire supports a rod attached to an axle in the wall and the mass is suspended at about half the length from the point where the where the wire is attached (the exact position is unimportant for my point).
We neglect friction from the wall. My question is: Is this equilibrium possible? Because in order for the center of mass of the rod not to fall the wires vertical force component must equal mg. But then that would mean, that it exerted a bigger torque than the mass forcing the rod to rotate anticlockwise. What would happen in this situation and is it possible to model without friction?
 

Attachments

  • Unavngivet.png
    Unavngivet.png
    2 KB · Views: 519
Physics news on Phys.org


Think about the 3 forces acting on the rod. For equilibrium, the moment of the forces about every point in the plane must be zero.

Now think about the point where the lines of action of two of the forces intersect. If the moment of all three forces about that point is 0, the line of action of the third force must also pass through that point.

What does that tell you about equilibrium, with or without friction at the wall?
 


there must be friction at the wall or... more likely the rod is fixed to he wall in some way.
The line of action of the force from the wall at A must pass through the intersection of the line of action of the weight of the beam (Mg) and the tension in the wire CB
If there are only 3 forces acing and the system is in equilibrium then the lines of action of the three forces must pass through one point.
This is a way of saying there is no overall turning effect
 


Aleph: hmm I'm sorry but I don't really understand those terms - I'm not that familiar with english, especially not physicsoriented english-speaking. Can you please explain it in another way?
The only solution I could come up with was that the vertical component of wires force was such that the torques balanced and then the friction force did the rest of the job of keeping up the center of mass, since that would exert no torque. But then, I wanted to know if it was possible without friction..
Tech: the rod is attached to an axle so it is definitely not fixed. So the conclusion would be that it is not possible without accounting for friction right?

In general what do both of you mean by "the line of action"? Just the direction of the force?
 


aaaa202 said:
Aleph: hmm I'm sorry but I don't really understand those terms - I'm not that familiar with english, especially not physicsoriented english-speaking. Can you please explain it in another way?

Draw the vectors showing the direction of the three forces acting on the bar

You know the force from the weight acts vertically.
You know the force from the wire acts along the wire.

Those two vectors intersect at a point (half way along the wire).

Take moments about that point. The moment of all 3 forces must be 0. So the direction of the force at the wall must also pass through the same point.

But the force at the wall can only act in that direction if there is friction at the wall...
 


hmm I tried that but doesn't really give me anything. But hey! When you say force at the wall are you then suggesting like an upwards normal force? Because when I said friction I was more or less also referring to normal forces of any kind. Indeed that would be able to explain since the string then only would have to lift such that the torques balanced and then the normal force would do the rest of the work. Is that what you are trying to say?
 


If the bar is horizontal, the the force at the wall must have a horizontal and a vertical component, because the resultant of those who components must pass through the same point at the other two forces (the middle point of the string). If there is no vertical force at the wall, because there is no friction, the bar will not be in equilibrium.

The bar can be in equilibrium without friction if it is sloping downwards, so the end touching the wall is at the same height as the middle point of the string.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
900
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K