Frequency & Wavelength of a Vibrating Wire

  • Thread starter Thread starter TRB8985
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Torques Weight
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a physics problem involving the torques acting on a vibrating wire and a post. Participants are exploring the implications of including the weight of the wire in the torque calculations and how it affects the overall tension in the system.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to analyze the torques acting on the system and questions whether the weight of the wire should be included in the torque calculations. Some participants inquire about the given angle and the distribution of the wire's weight.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing insights and clarifications regarding the setup of the problem. There is an acknowledgment of the complexity introduced by the wire's weight and its distribution, and some guidance has been offered regarding the relationship between tension and the forces acting on the joint.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the wire is assumed to be horizontal and that the problem involves specific angles and lengths that are critical to the torque calculations. There is a mention of the need for a free body diagram to clarify the forces and moments involved.

TRB8985
Messages
74
Reaction score
15
Homework Statement
A 5.00 m, 0.732 kg wire is used to support two uniform 235 N posts of equal length. Assume that the wire is essentially horizontal and that the speed of sound is 344 m/s. A strong wind is blowing, causing the wire to vibrate in its 5th overtone. What are the frequency and wavelength this wire produces?
(Theta = 57.0°)
Relevant Equations
f_n = n * v/2L ; v = sqrt(F/mu) ; v_sound = f_n * lambda_sound
Good morning,

I'm working through the problem from the homework statement above and answered it correctly, but I can't help but feel that something important is missing.

I was able to correctly identify the sum of torques by using the following diagram, where the CCW rotational direction represents a positive torque:

UntitledPF3.png


Equating the torque due to the weight of the post and the torque due to the tension (relative to point alpha) looks like this:
$$ W_{post} \cdot \frac {l}{2} cos(\theta) = T \cdot l sin(\theta) $$
This works out great, since the unknown length of the post (which I'm calling ##l##) cancels out and the tension can be used to solve the problem and get the right answer.

However, shouldn't we technically be including an additional torque due to the weight of the wire? Like this?

UntitledPF4.png


I wanted to try this and see what happens, but there's no obvious way to equate the torques which cancels out the length of the post like before:
$$ W_{post} \cdot \frac {l}{2} cos(\theta) = T \cdot l sin(\theta) + W_{wire} \cdot (2.50 m - l cos(\theta)) $$ It's possible to use geometry and determine the internal angles of this isoceles trapezoid figure, but that's not enough information to write the horizontal difference between ##\alpha## and the dashed line in terms of the post's unknown length.

It seems the only option is to just ignore the torque of the wire's weight and hand-wave it away as negligible compared to the other two forces, but that feels rather arbitrary.. is there a better way in the math to handle this situation?

Thank you!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi,

1. Is ##\theta ## given ?
2. the weight of the wire isn't fully on the attachment point, but uniformly distributed over the 5 m.

Where does the ## 2.50 {\text { m}} - l \cos\theta## come from ?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: TRB8985
Hey BvU,

Yeah, theta was provided in a picture with this problem. My bad on forgetting to include that. ##\theta = 57.0°##. Added to the homework statement as well.

In regards to your second statement, totally agree. That's why I've placed the center of mass of the wire at its halfway point along its length.

The ## 2.50 m - l cos(\theta) ## comes from the lever-arm between the point of rotation (##\alpha##) and the line of action of the weight of the wire acting at its center of mass:

UntitledPF5.png

Please let me know if anything else is missing or unclear.
 
TRB8985 said:
Hey BvU,

Yeah, theta was provided in a picture with this problem. My bad on forgetting to include that. ##\theta = 57.0°##. Added to the homework statement as well.

In regards to your second statement, totally agree. That's why I've placed the center of mass of the wire at its halfway point along its length.

The ## 2.50 m - l cos(\theta) ## comes from the lever-arm between the point of rotation (##\alpha##) and the line of action of the weight of the wire acting at its center of mass:

View attachment 334917
Please let me know if anything else is missing or unclear.

You are freeing the wire from the rod to examine ##T##. You either need to look at things from the perspective of the wire, or the perspective of the rod. I think you are mixing these two perspectives.

EDIT: But maybe that's ok if you can translate ##T## to the dashed line. However, the wire would have to be able to apply a moment to the end of the rod, I guess the question is...can it?

It can't hurt to make a FBD of the wire to see what needs to happen with the forces and moments.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: TRB8985
TRB8985 said:
Homework Statement: …. Assume that the wire is essentially horizontal

shouldn't we technically be including an additional torque due to the weight of the wire?
Not exactly.
The joint does not 'know' about the length of the wire. It directly experiences the tension.
In reality, the wire will not be quite straight, so the tension will also exert a downward force (the weight of the half wire) on the joint:
## W_{post} \cdot \frac {l}{2} \cos(\theta) +T_y\cdot l \cos(\theta)= T_x \cdot l \sin(\theta) ##
where ##T_y=\frac 12W_{wire}##.
For the frequency, need to consider the whole tension.

Btw, if you prefix trig functions, logs etc. with \ the LaTeX looks a bit cleaner.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: TRB8985
Thank you all for the input! I see where I've gone wrong here.
Much appreciated, have a great evening.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
Replies
46
Views
6K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K