F=ma for extended objects and movement of CM

  • Thread starter Thread starter mfactor
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    F=ma Movement
AI Thread Summary
In the discussion, the application of Newton's second law to a solid uniform rod under two opposing forces is analyzed. When 6N is applied to one end and 5N to the other, the net force acting on the center of mass is 1N, resulting in linear acceleration. Torque generated by the forces also affects the rod's angular acceleration, complicating the motion of points along the rod. The forces' orientation is crucial; if they remain perpendicular, the center of mass accelerates while the rod experiences rotational motion. Overall, the interplay of linear and angular dynamics must be considered for accurate motion analysis.
mfactor
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
OK, so for a small particle, \Sigma F=mais very straight forward. If two forces are applied to that particle, the particle accelerates, which is determined by the summation of the forces applied.


But what if the object is extended one, say, a solid uniform rod (1 kg). Also, imagine that I applied 6N on the left end and 5N on the right end, perpendicular to the rod, in opposite directions. (see attached picture).

What would be the resulting linear acceleration of the center of mass? Shouldn't F=ma still be applicable for center of mass only?
(Obviously torque is involved in this case also, but should it affect the linear accleration of the CM?)

how about an arbitrary portion of the rod (not center of mass)?


Picture: The red arrow up is 6N. The blue arrow down is 5N. The grey stick is the solid rod.
 

Attachments

  • rodphysics.GIF
    rodphysics.GIF
    1.4 KB · Views: 588
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The sum of the forces will determine, via Newton's 2nd law, the linear acceleration of the rod's center of mass. Similarly, the sum of the torques will determine the rod's angular acceleration about its center of mass. The motion of an arbitrary point on the rod will be a combination of both motions.
 
Is this one of those simple trick questions? I'm thinking that if I put 5N weight on the end of the rod and yank it up by the other end with 6N, it straightens out vertical, and it's like I'm pulling with 1N.
 
Farsight said:
Is this one of those simple trick questions? I'm thinking that if I put 5N weight on the end of the rod and yank it up by the other end with 6N, it straightens out vertical, and it's like I'm pulling with 1N.
No.

For one thing, you're assuming the forces are inertial - they point the same direction regardless of the orientation of the rod. The problem doesn't say one way or the other.

If the forces are always perpendicular to the rod, you have 1N of Force causing the center of mass to accelerate. You have 11N * (whatever the distance between the center of mass and the ends) worth of torque causing rotational acceleration.

If the forces are inertial, you have a moving pendulum. The center of mass accelerates due to the 1N force and the rod swings back and forth forever (theoretically, if those are the only two forces that act on the rod).
 
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Back
Top