Faulty approach to solving a double Atwood's machine

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on a faulty approach to solving a double Atwood's machine problem. The original poster derives an expression for the acceleration of mass m1 but realizes it is missing a term in the denominator compared to the reference solution. The error is identified in the application of the conservation of string, specifically the assumption that a2 = -a3 holds universally. It is clarified that this relationship only applies in the reference frame of the pulley, not from the ground perspective. The conversation emphasizes the importance of correctly applying the principles of mechanics to avoid such mistakes.
Rations
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hello. I'm wondering why my approach to solving this problem (Morin 3.2) is faulty.

Homework Statement


A double Atwood's machine is shown, with masses ##m_1##, ##m_2##, and ##m_3##. Find the accelerations of the masses.
3.2.PNG


Homework Equations


##F = ma##

The Attempt at a Solution


Let's say the string over the bottom pulley has tension ##T## and the string over the top pulley has tension ##T_2##. Assuming that the pulleys and ropes are massless and defining the upwards direction as positive, I have several equations:

(1) For ##m_1##: ##T_2 - m_1g = m_1a_1##
(2) For ##m_2##: ##T - m_2g = m_2a_2##
(3) For ##m_3##: ##T - m_3g = m_3a_3##
(4) For the lower pulley: ##T_2 - 2T = 0##
(5) From conservation of string: ##a_2 = -a_3##

If I substitute ##-a_3## into (2) and then solve (2) and (3) for ##T##, I find ##T = \frac{2m_2m_3g}{m_2 + m_3}##. From (4), ##T_2## is twice this value.

Then, I substitute my expression for ##T_2## into (1) and solve for ##a_1##, which yields:
a_1 = g\frac{4m_2m_3 - m_1(m_2 + m_3)}{m_1(m_2 + m_3)}

This answer is close to what Morin writes, but is missing a term in the denominator. After reading his solution, which uses the fact that ##a_1 = -\left(\frac{a_2 + a_3}{2}\right)##, I feel that I can understand why his approach works. However, I do not see where I made a mistake.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Rations said:
From conservation of string: a2=−a3a_2 = -a_3

This is where you have made a mistake . Why ?

Conservation of string can be looked at in two ways .
Since you use all accelerations in one direction , this would be an easier way to understand -

Total power by string must be zero ( Why ? ) . Power = F.v , so total sum of of each individual power provided by string must be equal to zero .

So 2T*v1 + T*v2 + T*v3 = 0 , or ,
2v1 + v2 + v3 = 0 .

So what relation do you get for acceleration ?

I hope this helps .
 
Oh, right. I just realized that ##a_2 = -a_3## only holds in the reference frame of the pulley, not the ground. Don't know why that point eluded me for so long. Thanks.
 
Rations said:
Hello. I'm wondering why my approach to solving this problem (Morin 3.2) is faulty.

Homework Statement


A double Atwood's machine is shown, with masses ##m_1##, ##m_2##, and ##m_3##. Find the accelerations of the masses.
View attachment 86504

Homework Equations


##F = ma##

The Attempt at a Solution


Let's say the string over the bottom pulley has tension ##T## and the string over the top pulley has tension ##T_2##. Assuming that the pulleys and ropes are massless and defining the upwards direction as positive, I have several equations:

(1) For ##m_1##: ##T_2 - m_1g = m_1a_1##
(2) For ##m_2##: ##T - m_2g = m_2a_2##
(3) For ##m_3##: ##T - m_3g = m_3a_3##
(4) For the lower pulley: ##T_2 - 2T = 0##
(5) From conservation of string: ##a_2 = -a_3##

If I substitute ##-a_3## into (2) and then solve (2) and (3) for ##T##, I find ##T = \frac{2m_2m_3g}{m_2 + m_3}##. From (4), ##T_2## is twice this value.

Then, I substitute my expression for ##T_2## into (1) and solve for ##a_1##, which yields:
a_1 = g\frac{4m_2m_3 - m_1(m_2 + m_3)}{m_1(m_2 + m_3)}

This answer is close to what Morin writes, but is missing a term in the denominator. After reading his solution, which uses the fact that ##a_1 = -\left(\frac{a_2 + a_3}{2}\right)##, I feel that I can understand why his approach works. However, I do not see where I made a mistake.
Your error is with the equation you get from the "conservation of string", as Qwertywerty points out.

A simple way to see that this is erroneous is: Suppose that m2 = m3 . Then we must have a2 = a3 , but these won't be zero in general.
 
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