Example Problem in the book, why is tension ignored?

AI Thread Summary
In the discussion about the Atwood machine problem, participants question why the tension in the string is ignored in the book's solution. The book treats the system of the two masses and the pulley as a single entity, allowing internal tensions to be disregarded. Some users suggest breaking the problem into separate components to derive equations for each mass and the pulley. The conversation also touches on the relationship between torque and angular momentum, clarifying that dL/dt can be applied within an inertial frame. Ultimately, the focus is on understanding the dynamics of the system while recognizing the simplifications made in the book's approach.
jzhu
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


An Atwood machine consists of two masses, M and m, which are connected by an inelastic cord of negligible mass that passes over a pulley. If the pulley has radius R and moment of inertia I about its axle, determine the acceleration of the masses M and m.

Homework Equations


torque = dL/dt
L(angular momentum) = R x v
L = Iω

The Attempt at a Solution



This is the solution in the book. I have no idea why tension of the string is ignored.

L = (m + M)vR + I(v/r) <- this part makes sense to me
torque = mgR - MgR <- this part does not make sense to me

Following the Atwood machine, shouldn't the forces for both m and M be something like
ΣF = F(tension) - mg = ma (differing signs depending on which is going down, of course)[/B]

Instead, the book has it as ΣF = mg

So then since torque is equal to RF, they get that torque = mgR

But my idea is that torque in this case is equal to RF(tension of m) - RF(tension of M)
which would mean that
torque = R(ma + mg) - R(mg - ma)

After this, we just plug torque into the t = dL/dt equation, and with the factored out velocity that we get from the total angular momentum, get acceleration from dv/dt and simple algebra reveals that the answer is a = (m-M)g/(m+M)+I/R^2.

Any help would be appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
jzhu said:
L = (m + M)vR + I(v/r) <- this part makes sense to me
jzhu said:
torque = mgR - MgR <- this part does not make sense to me
The book is treating the two masses and pulley as a single system. The tensions in the string would be internal to the system, so they can be ignored.

You can certainly break up the problem and treat the two masses and pulley separately, getting three equations. Then you can solve for the acceleration that way.
 
  • Like
Likes jzhu
Hm, I just solved it using t = Ia with the 2 forces. So does does mean that dl/dt can only be used from an inertial frame of reference? Or do dl/dt = ia?
 
jzhu said:
Hm, I just solved it using t = Ia with the 2 forces.
If you mean the two tensions, then that's fine. ΣT = Iα

jzhu said:
So does does mean that dl/dt can only be used from an inertial frame of reference? Or do dl/dt = ia?
If you let L = the angular momentum of the pulley only, then dL/dt will equal Iα.
 
Ok, thanks!
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top