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
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on solving for the tension in a beam supported by a pulley, assuming the system is in equilibrium. The user attempted to create a free-body diagram and set up equations for forces and moments but struggled with the correct placement of the beam's weight in the calculations. It was pointed out that the weight of the beam should be considered at its midpoint, not at an arbitrary point. Additionally, the user was advised to use a more accurate conversion for the beam's weight from kilograms to pounds. The conversation emphasizes the importance of correctly identifying all forces and their locations in equilibrium problems.
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...
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...

Similar threads

Replies
22
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
22
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
3K
Back
Top