Free-body diagram of mechanical system

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on clarifying the correct direction of arrows in free-body diagrams for two masses, M1 and M2, with participants debating whether the acceleration arrows should point downward. It is emphasized that the direction of arrows indicates a sign convention for forces, which can affect the resulting equations. A participant raises a question about the equation -kx - b*v_x = m*a_x, expressing confusion over how the net force can be zero while the object still moves. The explanation provided indicates that the net force is represented on the right side of the equation, and sometimes fictitious forces are used in analysis to simplify calculations. Understanding these concepts is crucial for accurately interpreting mechanical systems in physics.
PainterGuy
Messages
938
Reaction score
72
Hi,

Could you please help me with the queries below?

Question 1:
Do you think that the free-body diagram for M1 correct? It looks fine except that, I think, the arrow for M_{1}\frac{d^{2}}{dt^{2}}x_{1} should point downward.

Question 2:
Similarly, I think that the free-body diagram for M2 is okay but the arrow for M_{2}\frac{d^{2}}{dt^{2}}x_{2} should point downward instead. Could you please confirm it?
mechanical_system_free_body.jpg
 
Physics news on Phys.org
PainterGuy said:
I think, the arrow for M_{1}\frac{d^{2}}{dt^{2}}x_{1} should point downward.
The arrow directions just indicate the convention for the positive direction. It doesn't matter how you draw them.
 
Thank you!

A.T. said:
The arrow directions just indicate the convention for the positive direction. It doesn't matter how you draw them.

"positive direction" for what?

Also you said that it doesn't matter but, in my opinion, it does matter how the arrows are drawn. Please see the diagram for M1 where I've drawn the F=ma arrow downward, and as a result the equation also changes.

1614493267745.png
I have another related question and came across it when I was trying to understand the involved equations.

-kx - b*v_x = m*a_x

To me the equation above means that at any time, the force accelerate an object in x direction is equal and opposite to the spring force and damping force; in other words, the net force is zero. But then why would the object move at all if some forces are pulling the object backward and the other force pushing it forward? It should remain stationary. Where am I going wrong? Thank you!
1614490663675.png
 
Last edited:
PainterGuy said:
"positive direction" for what?
The arrows indicate the sign convention to be used for the forces. If you get a positive value for the force, it means that the force points in the direction that the arrow indicates. If you get a negative value, the force points opposite to the arrow.
PainterGuy said:
I have another related question and came across it when I was trying to understand the involved equations.

-kx - b*v_x = m*a_x

To me the equation above means that at any time, the force accelerate an object in x direction is equal and opposite to the spring force and damping force; in other words, the net force is zero.
The net force is the right hand side. Sometimes you introduce a fictitious force to cancel the net force, because you are not interested in the acceleration, just the internal stresses (quasi static analysis).
 
  • Like
Likes PainterGuy and Lnewqban
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...
Back
Top