Finding Tension in a Beam Supported by a Pulley: Solving for Equilibrium

  • Thread starter Thread starter taxidriverhk
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Beam Pulley
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on solving for tension in a beam supported by a pulley, specifically using static equilibrium equations. The correct tension (T) is determined to be 131 lb, while the force (FA) is calculated as FA = -206i + 188j lb. Key equations include ΣF=0 and ΣM=0, with emphasis on accurately representing the weight of the beam, which must be applied at its midpoint due to its uniform cross-section. Participants highlight the importance of including all forces in the free-body diagram (FBD) to achieve correct equilibrium calculations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of static equilibrium principles
  • Ability to draw and analyze free-body diagrams (FBD)
  • Knowledge of tension and force components in physics
  • Familiarity with moment calculations in mechanics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of static equilibrium in mechanical systems
  • Learn how to accurately draw and interpret free-body diagrams
  • Research the calculation of moments and their applications in beam analysis
  • Explore the effects of weight distribution in uniform beams
USEFUL FOR

Students in engineering mechanics, physics enthusiasts, and professionals involved in structural analysis or mechanical design will benefit from this discussion.

taxidriverhk
Messages
11
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Ho3pV26.jpg

[Ans: FA = -206i + 188j lb, T = 131 lb]

Homework Equations


Since it's assumed that the system is in equilibrium, so I assume that ΣF=0 and ΣM=0

The Attempt at a Solution


I tried to draw a free-body diagram for the system, and set up three equations below:
nX4yG9y.jpg

(I don't know the direction of FA yet, so I assume that both components are in positive direction)
ΣFx = FAx + Tcos45° + Tcos30° = 0
ΣFy = FAy - 150 - W + Tsin45° + Tsin30° = 0
ΣMz [Moment centered at A] = (16)(-150 - W) + (40)(Tsin30° + Tsin45°) + (6)(Tcos30° + Tcos45°) = 0

When I solved the third equation to find tension T, it didn't give me the right answer, I am not sure which part I did wrong, maybe I missed some forces on the free-body diagram, so I made a wrong equation of ΣMz?
Any hints or approaches are much appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In the FBD, and when calculating the moments, you don't put W = 20 kg at mid-point along the beam...
 
To clarify what NTW was trying to tell you, you somehow neglected to include the weight of the beam in your equations of static equilibrium.
 
SteamKing said:
To clarify what NTW was trying to tell you, you somehow neglected to include the weight of the beam in your equations of static equilibrium.
I think I had included the weight of the beam in FBD and equations, but maybe NTW is trying to tell me that the weight should be in another point along the beam?
 
taxidriverhk said:
I think I had included the weight of the beam in FBD and equations, but maybe NTW is trying to tell me that the weight should be in another point along the beam?

taxidriverhk said:

Homework Statement


Ho3pV26.jpg

[Ans: FA = -206i + 188j lb, T = 131 lb]

Homework Equations


Since it's assumed that the system is in equilibrium, so I assume that ΣF=0 and ΣM=0

The Attempt at a Solution


I tried to draw a free-body diagram for the system, and set up three equations below:
nX4yG9y.jpg

(I don't know the direction of FA yet, so I assume that both components are in positive direction)
ΣFx = FAx + Tcos45° + Tcos30° = 0
ΣFy = FAy - 150 - W + Tsin45° + Tsin30° = 0
ΣMz [Moment centered at A] = (16)(-150 - W) + (40)(Tsin30° + Tsin45°) + (6)(Tcos30° + Tcos45°) = 0

When I solved the third equation to find tension T, it didn't give me the right answer, I am not sure which part I did wrong, maybe I missed some forces on the free-body diagram, so I made a wrong equation of ΣMz?
Any hints or approaches are much appreciated.

If the beam has a mass of 20 kg, then the weight in lbs is easy to calculate. (Hint: using 2 lbs/kg is not really acceptable. 2.2 lbs/kg is more accurate)

If the beam has a uniform cross-section, then using a c.g. of 16 in. from A is not correct either. The c.g. of a uniform bar is going to be half its length, as measured from one end.
 
taxidriverhk said:
I think I had included the weight of the beam in FBD and equations, but maybe NTW is trying to tell me that the weight should be in another point along the beam?

Exactly. Mid-point, as it's a uniform beam...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
1K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
6K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K