How Do You Prove Static Equilibrium in a Three-Mass, Two-Pulley System?

  • Thread starter Thread starter kaienx
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Pulley
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a static equilibrium problem involving a system of three masses and two pulleys. The original poster presents a scenario where two masses (M1 and M3) each weigh 50.8 kg, and a third mass (M2) weighs 90 kg, with gravity assumed to be 10 m/s². The task is to prove the system's static equilibrium and explore the effects of adding an additional mass to M3 on the system's equilibrium state.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the original poster's calculations for static equilibrium and question whether the forces acting on M2 are correctly accounted for. There are inquiries about the implications of adding mass to M3 and how it affects the forces and potential movement of the masses. Some participants suggest drawing free body diagrams and writing equations to clarify the relationships between the forces and angles involved.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided feedback on the original poster's calculations, indicating that part 1 appears correct. There is ongoing exploration of how the addition of mass affects the equilibrium conditions, with suggestions to define new angles and forces. The discussion is active, with multiple interpretations being explored regarding the system's behavior after the mass is added.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the angles in the system will change with the addition of mass, and there is uncertainty about how to calculate the new angles and forces. The original poster expresses confusion about the implications of their calculations and the conditions for equilibrium.

kaienx
Messages
15
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I have 3 masses with 2 pulleys which is in static equilibrium.
M1 & M3= 50.8kg
M2 = 90kg
Gravity that I used = 10m/s²
Part 1
Prove that the system is in static equillibrium

Part 2
If I were to add another 10kg of mass to M3 is the force exerted from M3 the same force as the tension from the rope. Assuming the pulley and rope is massless?
And how do I find the displacement of all the masses (M1, M2, M3)?
Will the system be in an equilibrium or not?
If it's not, show how do you find the acceleration, velocity and displacement for all three masses.

Homework Equations


F = ma

The Attempt at a Solution


For part 1, from the equation I have drawn a FBD for M2 and have calculated the net forces of F(x) and F(y) for M2 which is:
Fx = 508 * cos (62.5) - 508 * cos (62.5) = 0;
Fy = (508 * sin (62.5) + 508 * sin (62.5)) - 900 = 0 (I round it off due to calculation approximation);

Am I doing the part 1 correctly? As I am assuming that the forces from M1 & M3) is acting on M2 so I took the forces from there and apply it on the FBD for M2.

For part 2, I can't really continue if I'm not sure whether part 1 is right (correct me if I'm wrong whether can I still continue on part 2). Even then, I'm trying to find the relationship between F = ma and the a, v, and s(displacement) cause I have been searching for the equation but I seem to be more lost than ever.

Thanks once again and I hope I don't sound too dumb as I am new to statics.
 

Attachments

  • download.png
    download.png
    17 KB · Views: 750
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Part 1 seems to be correct.

For part 2: Think about what is the necessary condition for a second equilibrium after increasing the mass M3 (hint: the angles α and β will be different then).
 
For part 2, the necessary condition for an equilibrium on the system is that all net forces must equal to 0, however, when I calculated after adding 10kg on M3, wouldn't the Fx and Fy for M2 also changes (correct me if I'm wrong), which means M2 will travel along the rope of M3, which will pull M1 up, resulting in an infinite acceleration thus can't be in an equilibrium? So sorry if I sound dumb or stupid, am really new at this and have been self taught from youtube tutorials and etc.
 
I'm not sure what is being asked in part 2. Are you to find a position of the masses which is at equilibrium (or show there is none such), or find the instantaneous acceleration from the given position?
 
haruspex said:
I'm not sure what is being asked in part 2. Are you to find a position of the masses which is at equilibrium (or show there is none such), or find the instantaneous acceleration from the given position?
Sorry for not being clear, it is to find a position of the masses after the addition of 10kg at M3 at equilibrium. However I am just curious of the instantaneous acceleration that will occur during the addition of 10kg mass (thus the displacement/velocity/acceleration). That's why I am kind of stuck here (this question was given by my lecturer to explore actually. :)
 
kaienx said:
Sorry for not being clear, it is to find a position of the masses after the addition of 10kg at M3 at equilibrium. However I am just curious of the instantaneous acceleration that will occur during the addition of 10kg mass (thus the displacement/velocity/acceleration). That's why I am kind of stuck here (this question was given by my lecturer to explore actually. :)
Ok. It was this line that threw me:
kaienx said:
If it's not, show how do you find the acceleration, velocity and displacement for all three masses.
The acceleration etc. will depend on the current position. If there's no new equilibrium, there's no position defined. And if you are going to consider accelerations etc. based on the staring point then it won't stop moving when at the equilibrium point.

Anyway, let's first try to find a new equlibrium. Have you drawn a free body diagram? Define some unknowns that describe the arrangement and the forces in it. What equations can you write down?
 
kaienx said:
For part 2, the necessary condition for an equilibrium on the system is that all net forces must equal to 0, however, when I calculated after adding 10kg on M3, wouldn't the Fx and Fy for M2 also changes (correct me if I'm wrong), [...}

Correct

kaienx said:
[...] which means M2 will travel along the rope of M3, which will pull M1 up, resulting in an infinite acceleration thus can't be in an equilibrium?

That's true and as haruspex wrote this only applies for the first moment - then the direction of the net force changes.

kaienx said:
So sorry if I sound dumb or stupid, am really new at this and have been self taught from youtube tutorials and etc.

Don't be to strict with yourself - it needs a little bit of training to solve this kind of problems. For the second equilibrium: Start to find the condition in horizontal direction.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: kaienx
To move to the new equilibrium, which way do you think the 90 kg mass has to move? Would the other masses move up or down? How would that affect the geometry?

Chet
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: kaienx
Chestermiller said:
To move to the new equilibrium, which way do you think the 90 kg mass has to move? Would the other masses move up or down? How would that affect the geometry?
Chet

I can only imagine that the affected mass (M3) will go down, thus M2 will go north east due to the resultant force applied from M3, which then M1 will have to move up to accommodate to the movement of M2.

Here's what I got so far:

Fx = 608 * cos (62.5) - 508 * cos (62.5) = 234.6 (rounded up);
Fy = (608 * sin (62.5) + 508 * sin (62.5)) - 900 = 89.9 (I round it off due to calculation approximation);
Thus, the Resultant force is: R = √Fx2 + Fy2 = 251.2;
and the resultant angle is: Rangle = arctan(89.9 / 234.6) = 21;

I'm not sure whether I'm doing it correctly but then again, after finding this, is the system at equilibrium when the mass with 90kg moves over to its new position?
 
  • #10
The angles will change also.
 
  • #11
Chestermiller said:
The angles will change also.
Meaning? Which angles? is it the α and β? I think my train of thought is stuck as I really do not know how to find the new α and β. So my calculations was wrong? No wonder!
 
  • #12
kaienx said:
Meaning? Which angles? is it the α and β? I think my train of thought is stuck as I really do not know how to find the new α and β. So my calculations was wrong? No wonder!
Yes. α and β both change. You need to find the new α and β. You do this by writing the force balances in the x and y directions in terms of α and β (algebraically), and solving for the new α and β.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: kaienx
  • #13
kaienx said:
For part 2, the necessary condition for an equilibrium on the system is that all net forces must equal to 0, however, when I calculated after adding 10kg on M3, wouldn't the Fx and Fy for M2 also changes (correct me if I'm wrong), which means M2 will travel along the rope of M3, which will pull M1 up, resulting in an infinite acceleration thus can't be in an equilibrium?
No, the new unbalanced force will cause a finite acceleration. First, calculate the new equilibrium angles (at least show the equations; solving them is tricky).
 
  • #14
insightful said:
No, the new unbalanced force will cause a finite acceleration. First, calculate the new equilibrium angles (at least show the equations; solving them is tricky).

So it will be something like,
Fx = 608 * cos (α) - 508 * cos (β) = 0;
Fy = (608 * sin (α) + 508 * sin (β)) - 900 = 0

I then used algebra to solve for Fx and got
(α) = cos-1(508 cos (β) / 608) = cos-1(0.84 cos (β)

This part I am stuck as it got a little tricky honestly.
does cos-1 cancel out cos (β)?
 
  • #15
Why not use Cosine Law.
 
  • #16
kaienx said:
So it will be something like,
Fx = 608 * cos (α) - 508 * cos (β) = 0;
Fy = (608 * sin (α) + 508 * sin (β)) - 900 = 0

I then used algebra to solve for Fx and got
(α) = cos-1(508 cos (β) / 608) = cos-1(0.84 cos (β)

This part I am stuck as it got a little tricky honestly.
does cos-1 cancel out cos (β)?
Solving these two simultaneous equations for the two angles is a little challenging mathematically, but doable. If you do it by brute force, though, it will be pretty difficult.
 
  • #17
kaienx said:
So it will be something like,
Fx = 608 * cos (α) - 508 * cos (β) = 0;
Fy = (608 * sin (α) + 508 * sin (β)) - 900 = 0
I have M1 and alpha on the left, and M3 and beta on the right on your diagram.
In my equations, alpha and beta are reversed from yours(?).
Anyway, I just used trial and error and got 3 significant figures in 7 trials.
 
  • #18
insightful said:
I have M1 and alpha on the left, and M3 and beta on the right on your diagram.
In my equations, alpha and beta are reversed from yours(?).
Anyway, I just used trial and error and got 3 significant figures in 7 trials.
Yes apologies it is supposed to be
Fx = 508 * cos (α) - 608 * cos (β) = 0;
Fy = (508 * sin (α) + 608 * sin (β)) - 900 = 0

(α) = cos-1(608 cos (β) / 508) = cos-1(1.2 cos (β))
replace (a) to Fy's equation I get:
508 * sin(cos-1(1.2 cos (β))) + 608 * sin (β)) - 900 = 0;
508 * sin(cos-1(1.2 cos (β))) + 608 * sin (β)) = 900;

I wanted to factorise but it doesn't seem that there's any common values.
Anyway,
@azizlwl cosine law? as far as I can remember I think need to know the three sides which is currently unknown at the moment, no?
 
  • #19
$$\cosα=\frac{508}{608}\cosβ$$
$$\sinα=\sqrt{1-\left(\frac{508}{608}\right)^2\cos^2β}=\sqrt{1-\left(\frac{508}{608}\right)^2+\left(\frac{508}{608}\right)^2\sin^2β}$$
Substitution in Fy equation yields:
$$\sqrt{608^2-508^2+508^2\sin^2β}+508\sinβ=900\tag{1}$$If we multiply numerator and denominator of the left hand side of this equation by##\sqrt{608^2-508^2+508^2\sin^2β}-508\sinβ##, we obtain:
$$\frac{608^2-508^2}{\sqrt{608^2-508^2+508^2\sin^2β}-508\sinβ}=900\tag{2}$$
If we invert Eqn. 2, we obtain:
$$\sqrt{608^2-508^2+508^2\sin^2β}-508\sinβ=124\tag{3}$$
If we subtract Eqn. 3 from Eqn. 1, we obtain:
$$1016\sinβ=776$$or$$\sinβ=\frac{776}{1016}$$So, β=49.8 degrees

Chet
 
  • #20
kaienx said:
Yes apologies it is supposed to be
Fx = 508 * cos (α) - 608 * cos (β) = 0;
Fy = (508 * sin (α) + 608 * sin (β)) - 900 = 0

(α) = cos-1(608 cos (β) / 508) = cos-1(1.2 cos (β))
replace (a) to Fy's equation I get:
508 * sin(cos-1(1.2 cos (β))) + 608 * sin (β)) - 900 = 0;
508 * sin(cos-1(1.2 cos (β))) + 608 * sin (β)) = 900;

I wanted to factorise but it doesn't seem that there's any common values.
Anyway,
@azizlwl cosine law? as far as I can remember I think need to know the three sides which is currently unknown at the moment, no?
You have 3 sides(vectors) 900, 608 and 508 in equilibrium.
 
  • #21
Chestermiller said:
$$\cosα=\frac{508}{608}\cosβ$$
$$\sinα=\sqrt{1-\left(\frac{508}{608}\right)^2\cos^2β}=\sqrt{1-\left(\frac{508}{608}\right)^2+\left(\frac{508}{608}\right)^2\sin^2β}$$
Substitution in Fy equation yields:
$$\sqrt{608^2-508^2+508^2\sin^2β}+508\sinβ=900\tag{1}$$If we multiply numerator and denominator of the left hand side of this equation by##\sqrt{608^2-508^2+508^2\sin^2β}-508\sinβ##, we obtain:
$$\frac{608^2-508^2}{\sqrt{608^2-508^2+508^2\sin^2β}-508\sinβ}=900\tag{2}$$
If we invert Eqn. 2, we obtain:
$$\sqrt{608^2-508^2+508^2\sin^2β}-508\sinβ=124\tag{3}$$
If we subtract Eqn. 3 from Eqn. 1, we obtain:
$$1016\sinβ=776$$or$$\sinβ=\frac{776}{1016}$$So, β=49.8 degrees

Chet

Thank you! Took me a whole day to understand how did you obtain those values and I think I got the accurate answers using different masses on M3. So the new position of the M2 is determined from the new tensions from M3, am I right?
 
Last edited:
  • #22
kaienx said:
Thank you! Took me a whole day to understand how did you obtain those values and I think I got the accurate answers using different masses on M3. So the new position of the M2 is determined from the new tensions from M3, am I right?
Sure.
 
  • #23
Chestermiller said:
So, β=49.8 degrees
Shouldn't this be alpha for the problem as in the diagram?
 
  • #24
insightful said:
Shouldn't this be alpha for the problem as in the diagram?
I really am unable to clearly make out what's written on the diagram. So, probably yes. All I did was solve the equations that were presented.
 
  • #25
@insightful yes that is correct, it should be alpha, apologies as I myself got confused with the whole question. But thanks for pointing that out! :) Anyway, there is no way to find out the displacement from the first equilibrium position to the second equilibrium position with just those two equations?
 
  • #26
kaienx said:
@insightful yes that is correct, it should be alpha, apologies as I myself got confused with the whole question. But thanks for pointing that out! :) Anyway, there is no way to find out the displacement from the first equilibrium position to the second equilibrium position with just those two equations?
No. You need to know the distance between the pulleys (or some characteristic distance).
 
  • #27
The distance between pulleys meaning, the red line? (See picture for reference). If I were to have the values, can I assume that I will be able to solve using basic trigonometric formulas seeing that I have the angles needed? (TOA CAH SOH).
 

Attachments

  • download.jpg
    download.jpg
    43.8 KB · Views: 451
  • #28
kaienx said:
The distance between pulleys meaning, the red line? (See picture for reference). If I were to have the values, can I assume that I will be able to solve using basic trigonometric formulas seeing that I have the angles needed? (TOA CAH SOH).
Yes.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: kaienx

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
25
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
7K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
8K