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

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem involving the calculation of tension in a beam supported by a pulley, with a focus on ensuring the system is in equilibrium. Participants are analyzing forces and moments acting on the beam, considering the weight of the beam and its placement in the free-body diagram.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the setup of equations based on static equilibrium, including forces in the x and y directions and moments about a point. There is uncertainty regarding the correct placement of the beam's weight in the free-body diagram and its impact on the equations.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered hints regarding the placement of the beam's weight and the calculation of tension. There is an ongoing exploration of the assumptions made in the free-body diagram and the equations derived from it. Multiple interpretations of the weight's location are being considered.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the assumption that the system is in equilibrium and are attempting to clarify the implications of the beam's weight and its center of gravity. There is mention of specific values and units that may affect the calculations, such as the conversion from kg to lbs.

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
2K
  • · 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