Falling chimney internal torque

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the mechanics of a falling chimney and the analysis of internal torque and forces acting on it. The initial approach calculates internal torque using a formula that considers the distance from the rotation point, leading to the conclusion that internal torque is maximized at one-third the chimney's length. However, doubts arise regarding whether maximizing internal torque is the correct approach, as it may not accurately predict where the chimney would break. The complexity of the problem is acknowledged, emphasizing the need for simplifying assumptions about the failure mechanism, such as shear forces or compression. Ultimately, the analysis suggests that while torque is a significant factor, the reasoning behind the chimney's breakage remains unclear.
dEdt
Messages
286
Reaction score
2
Suppose a (uniform) chimney began falling. Where would the chimney break? I approached the problem by considering the torque acting on a point along the chimney, at a distance x from the point of rotation. I got the internal torque + external torque = (mx^2)(3gcosA/2L), where A is the angle between the chimney and the ground, m is the mass of the point, and L is the length of the chimney. The external torque is just mgcosA; using this, I get that the internal torque is maximized at x = L/3. This, at least, was the given solution. But thinking some more, I began doubting my solution. Shouldn't I be trying to maximize the internal force rather than the internal torque? But doing that yields silly answers, so that seems wrong too. Help please!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Figuring out exactly how a chimney would break would be an extremely complicated problem! To solve it--as you clearly know--you have to make simplifying assumptions.
For instance, you have to guess why it would break--i.e. from shear forces? compression? expansion? torque?

Conceptually, torque seems like a good bet--i.e. the chimney would snap, in which case your analysis is great.
 
I can't see why torque would make it snap though. So what if the torque is maximized there? Worse still, the second derivative is actually positive at x = L/3, so I think it's a minimum in actuality.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top