misskitty said:
Not really anything specific. Some of it is specific like: How do you know where to put your lever arm in a problem that asks you to calculate how much torque is being applied to the object in equilibrium, with several other forces involved? I just need some guidance on how to break the stuff down.
The first step is always always always draw a Free-body diagram with all of the forces involved. That means gravity, normal force, and all of the forces applying torques. You know that if the object is in equilibrium, then ALL of the forces are canceled out by their opposing ones, and all of the TORQUES are also canceled out. This drawing is important even on the "simple" problems, and even experienced people use them. Don't be ashamed to draw a picture!
The key in this particular situation is to find all the torques acting clockwise, and all of the torques acting counter-clockwise, and set them equal to each other (Or, subtract one set of torques from the other, and set them equal to 0). You may very well not know the size of some of the torques, so you must use symbols instead of numbers. That's ok. If there is enough information in the problem, it will all work out eventually.
The next thing to realize is that the sum of the downward forces will equal the sum of the upward forces, and the sum of the leftward forces will equal the sum of the rightward forces (F_y=\sum F_{up} + \sum F_{down} = 0,\ and \ F_x=\sum F_{left}+\sum F_{right} =0). Since all of the forces cancel, the object remains at rest. If you are unfamiliar with the \sum character, it simply means "sum".
After that, it's a simple matter of solving for whatever unknown variable you have, and you're done! It's always best to take any problem and try and picture what's going on. Always draw a picture, and always label the forces. If you know something about the situation, you should then be able to add up the forces and set them equal to something (0 if equilibrium, ma if moving)...then work backwards from there.
misskitty said:
Is there any way to understand it all.
Sadly, no, although some of us would like to think we know it all
