General equivalent couple - force system

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
2 replies · 2K views
Portuga
Messages
56
Reaction score
6

Homework Statement



Hello gentlemen!

I came across a real challeging problem about static, which states
the following: assume a force system is equivalent to a force [itex]\vec{F}_{1}[/itex] and a couple [itex]M_{1}\vec{k}[/itex] acting at a point [itex]\vec{r}_{1}[/itex]. Find some point [itex]\vec{r}_{2}[/itex] and a force [itex]\vec{F}_{2}[/itex] so that [itex]\vec{F}_{2}[/itex] acting at [itex]\vec{r}_{2}[/itex] is equivalent to [itex]\vec{M}_{1}[/itex] acting at [itex]\vec{r}_{1}[/itex].

As it is a little more difficult problem, the author provided a solution:
[tex] \vec{r}_{2}=\vec{r}_{1}+\frac{\vec{F}_{1}\times\hat{k}M_{1}}{F_{1}^{2}},[/tex] and
[tex] \vec{F}_{2}=\vec{F}_{1}.[/tex]

Homework Equations



My first attempt was to use the equivalence of the couples:
[tex] \vec{r}_{1}\times\vec{F}_{1}=\vec{r}_{2}\times\vec{F}_{2}=M_{1}\hat{k},[/tex]
and the BAC - CAB rule for double cross product: [itex]\vec A \times \vec B \times \vec C = \vec B (\vec A \ldotp \vec C) - \vec C (\vec A \ldotp \vec B)[/itex]

The Attempt at a Solution


That [itex]\vec{F}_1 = \vec{F}_2[/itex], it's obvious, because of the equivalence of the forces systems. So I focused on the equivalence of the couples.
I realized that only the last two members of the vectorial equation were interesting for this:
[tex] \begin{aligned} & \vec{F}_{1}\times\vec{r}_{2}\times\vec{F}_{2}=\vec{F}_{1}\times M_{1}\hat{k}\\<br /> \Rightarrow & \vec{r}_{2}\left(\vec{F}_{1}\ldotp\vec{F}_{2}\right)-\left(\vec{F}_{1}\ldotp\vec{r}_{2}\right)\vec{F}_{2}=\vec{F}_{1}\times M_{1}\hat{k}\\<br /> \Rightarrow & \vec{r}_{2}=\frac{\left(\vec{F}_{1}\ldotp\vec{r}_{2}\right)\vec{F}_{2}+\vec{F}_{1}\times M_{1}\hat{k}}{\vec{F}_{1}\ldotp\vec{F}_{2}}.<br /> \end{aligned}[/tex]So my point is: if there is freedom to choose both [itex]\vec{r}_{2}[/itex] and [itex]\vec{F}_{2}[/itex] , it's not possible to assume that these vectors should be related to the parameters of the problem, [itex]\vec{r}_{1}[/itex], [itex]\vec{F}_{1}[/itex] and [itex]M_{1}\hat{k}[/itex] as the author requires in his solution. Am I right or am I missing something really important on this issue?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Looks to me like you missed the easy part. If the net force on the system is originally F1, and the net force is to be held constant, then F2 = F1. Doesn't that enable you to finish your development of r2?
 
Well, basically, if [itex]\vec{F}_1 = \vec{F}_2[/itex], then it will be mandatory that [itex]\vec{r}_1 = \vec{r}_2[/itex], don't you think? Even if I put this reasoning forward, the result would be strange:
[tex] \begin{aligned}\vec{r}_{2} & =\frac{\left(\vec{F}_{1}\ldotp\vec{r}_{2}\right)\vec{F}_{1}+\vec{F}_{1}\times M_{1}\hat{k}}{F_{1}^{2}}\\<br /> & =\frac{\left(\vec{F}_{1}\ldotp\vec{r}_{1}\right)\vec{F}_{1}+\vec{F}_{1}\times M_{1}\hat{k}}{F_{1}^{2}}\\<br /> & =r_{1}\cos\theta\hat{F}_{1}+\frac{\vec{F}_{1}\times M_{1}\hat{k}}{F_{1}^{2}}<br /> \end{aligned}[/tex]
 
Last edited: