Deriving Formula to Solve Least Force Needed for Board Against Wall

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving the formula for the least force needed to hold a board against a wall, specifically using F=mg/f. Participants explore the origins of this formula, linking it to free-body analysis and equilibrium conditions. The relationship between the reaction force from the wall and the frictional force is highlighted, indicating that Ffrict equals mg times the coefficient of friction. Clarification is sought on why the formula uses division instead of multiplication, emphasizing the need for a deeper understanding of the underlying physics. Overall, the conversation underscores the importance of analyzing forces in equilibrium to derive accurate solutions.
caseys
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
In solving the problem of the least force needed to hold a board against the wall to prevent it from sliding down when the cof is known...the formula of F=mg/f was used to come up with the correct answer. Having found this formula in solving the problem it would be beneficial to also understand where this formula was derived from.

When looking at F=ma, a=gf, F=mg ...I just can not the way to derivating where the formula to solve the problem came from. Appreciate a boot in the correct direction...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I wouldn't normally call something like this a formula. It is "derived" from a free-body-analysis, in which the net forces acting on the ladder in the x and y directions must be equal to zero. They are a certain set of conditions for a given physical situation which can lead you to definite solutions such as the "formula" you mention.

If you draw such a diagram, you will see that at all times, for the ladder to remain in equilibrium, the reaction force from the wall will be equal to the frictional force, Ffrict = mg x f.
 
Thanks mezarashi...that is what I was thinking also of Ffrict = mg x f ... however, to come up for the correct answer for the problem it was neccesary to use mg/f ... just could not understand why the mg was divided by f rather than multiplied.
 
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