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.
 
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top