Friction problem involving a pulley

  • Thread starter Thread starter issacnewton
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Friction Pulley
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a friction problem involving a pulley system, focusing on the moment of inertia and the dynamics of multiple blocks connected by strings. Participants explore the relationships between forces, tensions, and accelerations in the system.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants examine the moment of inertia of the pulley and question the definitions of mass and radius. They discuss the equations governing the system, including torque and tension, and raise concerns about the assumptions regarding the accelerations of the blocks.

Discussion Status

The discussion has evolved with participants providing insights and corrections regarding the setup of equations. Some have suggested re-evaluating the relationships between the blocks' accelerations and the forces acting on them, leading to a more nuanced understanding of the problem.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the absence of friction between block B and the ground and consider the friction between blocks B and C as internal forces. There is an ongoing exploration of the implications of treating the blocks as a system versus individually.

issacnewton
Messages
1,035
Reaction score
37

Homework Statement


I am posting the snapshot of the problem

Homework Equations


Moment of Inertia equations

The Attempt at a Solution


Now, the pulley has the moment of inertia ##I = 1.5MR^2##. This is strange, since the coefficient of ##MR^2## is less than or equal to 1. So, this means that ##M## is not the mass of the pulley or ##R## is not the radius of the pulley. Do you think my suspicion is correct ?
problem.png
 

Attachments

  • problem.png
    problem.png
    29.1 KB · Views: 1,375
Physics news on Phys.org
IssacNewton said:
M is not the mass of the pulley
Correct. M is given as the mass of the suspended mass at A. This is being used as the unit of mass throughout.
 
Right. So ##R## must be the radius of the pulley. Now let ##T_2## be the tension in the vertical part of the string and ##T_1## be the tension in the horizontal part of the string. Then we can write the following equations if ##a## is the magnitude of the downward acceleration of block A.
$$ \tau_{net} = I\alpha = 1.5MR^2 (a/R)$$
$$ \tau_{net} = (T_1 - T_2) R$$
$$ Mg - T_2 = Ma$$
$$ T_1 = 5Ma$$
so solving, we get ##T_2 = M(g-a)##. Now let ##f## be the kinetic friction between blocks B and C. Also, let ##a_2## be the acceleration of block C in ground frame. So we can write the equations
$$ f = 3M a_2$$
$$ T_1 - f= 2M a $$
And this leads us to conclude that
$$5Ma - 3M a_2 = 2M a$$
$$\to a_2 = a$$
But this does not seems right. I think the acceleration of block B and C are not the same. And I am getting it the same. Whats happening here ?
 
IssacNewton said:
$$ T_1 = 5Ma$$?
No.
 
There is no friction between block B and the ground. And friction between blocks B and C can be considered the internal forces. So I considered the blocks B and C as a system and then applied the Newton's second law to them. Is that a problem ?
 
IssacNewton said:
There is no friction between block B and the ground. And friction between blocks B and C can be considered the internal forces. So I considered the blocks B and C as a system and then applied the Newton's second law to them. Is that a problem ?
Yes, because you are told the two blocks move relative to each other, so do not have the same acceleration. Your equation would be ok if the acceleration in it referred to their common mass centre.
 
But can't we take both blocks B and C as a system ?. So there is just one external force in the horizontal direction on this system, which is ##T_1##.
 
IssacNewton said:
But can't we take both blocks B and C as a system ?. So there is just one external force in the horizontal direction on this system, which is ##T_1##.
Yes, but as I wrote that would mean the acceleration in question is that of the common mass centre, not of either of the individual blocks.
 
Oh, ok I got what you are saying. So let me set up separate equations for blocks B and C. For block B, I would have
$$ T_1 - f = 2Ma $$
and equation for block C would be
$$ f = 3M a_2$$
and we also get the third equation which is from the torque equation.
$$T_1 - T_2 = 1.5 Ma$$
so with the help of above equations, we can now say that
$$ T_1 = 2Ma + 3Ma_2$$
$$ T_2 = Mg - Ma$$
and after plugging this in the torque equation, we get
$$(2Ma + 3Ma_2) - (Mg-Ma) = 1.5Ma$$
This simplifies to
$$a_2 = \frac{g}{3} - \frac{a}{2}$$
Now, if ##\mu_k## is the cofficient of kinetic friction between blocks B and C, then we have ##f = \mu_k (3Mg)##. So we have the equation
$$f = \mu_k (3Mg) = 3M a_2$$
after plugging for ##a_2## , we get
$$\mu_k = \frac{1}{3} - \frac{a}{2g} $$
And, we are given in the problem that ##a = 2\;m/s^2##, so after plugging for that, we get ##\mu_k = 0.23##. Does this sound right ? I think something went wrong since we get that ##a_2 = 2.27\; m/s^2##. This means that block C's acceleration in ground frame is greater than the acceleration of block B. This can not happen since block C is sliding to the left relative to the block B.
 
  • #10
IssacNewton said:
the third equation which is from the torque equation.
Check the signs on that one.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: issacnewton
  • #11
Ah, yes, so we have
$$ T_1 -T_2 = -1.5 Ma$$
Then the equation for ##a_2## becomes
$$ a_2 = \frac{g}{3} - \frac{3a}{2} $$
This will give us ##a_2 = 0.27 \; m/s^2##, which now make sense. So coefficient of kinetic friction would now become
$$ \mu_k = \frac{1}{3} - \frac{3a}{2g} $$
So, with ##a= 2\; m/s^2##, we get ##\mu_k = 0.027##, which matches with the final answer given.
Thanks haruspex. These torques always cause me confusion about the signs.
 

Similar threads

Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
14K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K