1. Not finding help here? Sign up for a free 30min tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

How long does it take mass m to fall distance h?

  1. Sep 16, 2010 #1
    1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data

    [PLAIN]http://rawrspace.com/Capture.JPG [Broken]

    So when you draw out a force diagram, we find these two equations
    rewriting in terms of T
    rewriting in terms of T

    I set the two equations equal to each other so I could solve for the acceleration since it is as rest when it starts (I figured that means that initial velocity is 0 )
    setting them equal I get:
    Then I moved them so that I could start factoring out terms:
    finally, solving for a:

    I also know that y-y_0=V_0t-(1/2)at^2
    Since y final is 0 and y_0 is h, I get this equation:
    So this means that

    Pluging in a that I solved for above, I get


    That was my answer of the time it takes for the mass m to fall a distance h. Does that seem correct to you, or am I overlooking something ?
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 16, 2010 #2


    User Avatar
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    It looks right to me except your answer has f in it and you are specifically required to write the answer in terms of m, M, h, θ and μ. So how can you get rid of f and introduce μ?
  4. Sep 16, 2010 #3
    Thank you for taking a look. I don't know why I wrote it like that on here, on my paper I have μN for the frictional force instead of just the f for frictional force..

    Thank's again for taking a look.
  5. Sep 16, 2010 #4


    User Avatar
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    You're still not there because μN won't do either. What is N in terms of the given quantities m, M, h, θ?
  6. Sep 16, 2010 #5
    Well N is the normal force so it is the opposite component the gravitational force which is Mg so it would be -Mgcos[tex]\vartheta[/tex] wouldn't it (assuming I take my g to be positive)? That would still leave me with a g though which isn't in those terms. Is it okay to have g since it is a constant ? If so then I would replace -f with μMgcos[tex]\vartheta[/tex] (it would be positive correct, as -f = -μN = -μ(-Mgcos[tex]\vartheta[/tex]) )

    So I would like to write my answer as

  7. Sep 16, 2010 #6


    User Avatar
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    Don't forget that, in your original expression, f stands for the magnitude of the frictional force. That is a positive number. So f = μN = Mgcosθ. You already took care of the direction when you wrote down T-Mgsinθ-f=Ma.
  8. Sep 16, 2010 #7
    So It would be μMgcosθ correct since N = Mgcosθ , and f = μN

    So that means that it would be -μMgcosθ in the problem instead of -f


    I believe that would be correct as it is now in the correct terms, I moved the M+m to the numerator. Does that seem correct now, If it was -f which took care of the magnitude since it subtracted in the original force equation. Then replacing it with the information I derived above should be correct.
  9. Sep 16, 2010 #8


    User Avatar
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

  10. Sep 16, 2010 #9
    Thank you for helping me understand where I went wrong.
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook