Force transferred across a fulcrum

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter blondie :)
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Force Fulcrum
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on calculating force transferred across a fulcrum using the formula N_1m_1=N_2m_2, where N represents force and m represents distance from the fulcrum. This formula is applicable only in equilibrium scenarios, meaning the system is balanced and stationary. When tension is released on one side of the fulcrum, no force is transferred to the other side, resulting in downward movement instead. For non-equilibrium situations, such as catapults, considerations of energy, momentum, and angular momentum become crucial.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of static equilibrium in physics
  • Familiarity with the concepts of force and torque
  • Knowledge of energy conservation principles
  • Basic grasp of angular momentum
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the principles of static equilibrium in physics
  • Learn about torque calculations and their applications
  • Study energy conservation in mechanical systems
  • Explore angular momentum and its implications in dynamic systems
USEFUL FOR

Physics students, mechanical engineers, and anyone interested in understanding the mechanics of levers and catapults.

blondie :)
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Ok, I am wondering what the formula is for calculating force across a fulcrum. If you were to have tension on one side of a fulcrum, and release that tension, how much force is transferred to the other side of the fulcrum?

Thanks,

Mitch Guzman
 
Physics news on Phys.org
[tex]N_1m_1=N_2m_2[/tex] Where everything subscripted 1 is on one side and everything 2 is on the other, N is force, and m is distance away from the fulcrum. Rearranging it produces [tex]N_1\frac{m_1}{m_2}=N_2[/tex]. This only useful for equilibrium problems, i.e. the arm is balanced and not moving. Removing the force on the one side, will only allow the force of the other side to move down, i.e. no force is tranfered.
Not sure what you mean by your wording and the fact that your example is a non-equilibrium problem. That sounds more like a catapult, in which case you would be more interested in energy, momentum, and angular momentum of the arm so you know how massive to make your base so it doesn't jump up and crush someone or something important.
 
I suppose it would be more like a catapult actually. I suppose I'll have to search up energy and angular momentum then.

Thanks :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
12K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K