Equilibrium and wire tension problem

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the tension in a volleyball net supported by two guy wires anchored to the ground. The initial calculations led to a tension of 60 N, but the book states the answer is 100 N. Participants emphasized the need to resolve the tension into horizontal components and correctly account for the angles involved. The horizontal components of the tension from each wire must be added as vectors, not scalars, to determine the net force on the pole. Ultimately, the correct approach involves using the law of sines and ensuring accurate measurements of angles and distances to arrive at the correct tension value.
FarazAli
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
the problem as in the book
"Two guy wires run from the top of a pole 2.6 m tall that supports a volleyball net. The two wires are anchored to the ground 2.0 m apart and each is 2.0m from the pole. The tension in each wire is 95 N. What is the tension in the net, assumed horizontal and attached at the top of the pole?" - I've attached an image.

What I tried to do was figure out the distance from one wire to the top of the pole.
X = (2.6m^2 + 2.0m^2)^{\frac{1}{2}} = 3.28m

Then using the sum of torques (which is zero in equilibrium) at the first rope as the pivot point
\sum\tau = -\tau_{2} + F_{tensioninnet}X = 0 \Rightarrow F_{tensionnet} = \frac{\tau_{2}}{X} = \frac{95N \cdot 2.0m}{3.28m}

I get 60N, but the answer in the back of the book is 100 Newtons. I also noticed if I multiplied the answer by tan(60) (equilateral triangle at the bottom), and I get 100 N
 

Attachments

  • diagram.GIF
    diagram.GIF
    2.3 KB · Views: 1,034
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
No need for distances or torques. Find the net horizontal force exerted by the guy wires on the pole.
 
but we don't have a system in only two directions do we?
 
FarazAli said:
but we don't have a system in only two directions do we?
Figure it out in steps. First, find the component in the horizontal plane of the tension from each wire. Then add those two horizontal plane components to find the net force from the wires in the horizontal plane.
 
so I resolve the tension into components. You would need an angle to resolve the x-component. We have none. So what I tried was using the law of sines, sin^{-1}\left(\frac{sin 90 \cdot 2.6m}{3.8m}\right) = \theta = 43.2.

So I multiplied the tension times cosine of this to get 65N. So the tension in the net is supposed to be two times this (two guy wires), which is 138N. The answer is 100 N however
 
FarazAli said:
so I resolve the tension into components. You would need an angle to resolve the x-component. We have none. So what I tried was using the law of sines, sin^{-1}\left(\frac{sin 90 \cdot 2.6m}{3.8m}\right) = \theta = 43.2.
You used 3.8m instead of 3.28m.

So I multiplied the tension times cosine of this to get 65N. So the tension in the net is supposed to be two times this (two guy wires), which is 138N. The answer is 100 N however.
These horizontal-plane components are not parallel, so you can't just add them like scalars. Once you get the correct horizontal component, find the angle the two components make and add them like vectors.

Think of the coordinate system this way: the z-axis is vertical (along the pole); the x-axis is parallel to the net; the y-axis perpendicular to the net. The force that each wire exerts on the pole has components along each axis. First find the component of each in the x-y plane (what I've been calling the horizontal plane). Once you've done that, add those two vectors to find the net force in the horizontal plane.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top