Mechanical advantage of a moving pulley vs an anchored pulley

In summary: Why not just lean the side posts into meet at the top?You would need to replace the rope section joining them with another post? Why not just lean the side posts into meet at the top?
  • #1
Rolacycle
26
12
Homework Statement
I understand how to calculate mechanical advantage ratio, I think. The question I have does the MA change when a moving pulley (p6) is the anchor point of another pulley (p3) and does that then make (p3) a moving pulley thus effecting MA ratio?
Relevant Equations
I’m not sure
FE707308-9240-496A-A244-0C5B7A5D3514.jpeg

This is deer feeder pulley system I plan to make unless there is more efficient way to use the same 6 pulleys and pull load centered between the two poles
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
What is it you are trying to maximize with your pulleys? This certainly doesn't lift max weight. Do you need side to side freedom etc etc. I have no experience here.
Also pulleys will equilibrate as required by the various Forces (Tensions). Your drawing is not accurate...the tension is the same everywhere in the rope (~30lb in this rig) because that is what a rope does. The top rope, for instance, will not be that straight.
 
  • Like
Likes Rolacycle
  • #3
It’s about lifting and remaining centered in between the 2 poles holding all this up, not necessary the most effective MA system. And no you’d only raise load to point where p6 stays centered
 
Last edited:
  • #4
Do you want the pull rope to be at the pole? And how high do you need to lift...this will get harder with altitude
 
  • #5
hutchphd said:
Do you want the pull rope to be at the pole? And how high do you need to lift...this will get harder with altitude
I certainly don’t want to stand there and hold it up. And it’s got to be where it can be tied off and secured.
 

Attachments

  • 38CB3498-3033-4C92-8C8F-E77DFA37626D.jpeg
    38CB3498-3033-4C92-8C8F-E77DFA37626D.jpeg
    64.7 KB · Views: 409
  • #6
I do not think this will work quite the way you want. It would require high tension to keep the rope as flat as it is at p6, but it clearly isn’t that tight as can be seen from the angles at p4 and p2. What will happen is the angles at p6 and p4 and p2 will flatten out more or less together. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, and may constitute some extra mechanical advantage, but it seems overly complicated and unnecessary. Also, if you feel strongly about getting the rope relatively flat at p6 you would need several hundred pounds of tension in the rope at which point the lower rope would also be flat.

It would be easy to make it work the way you want. Why not get rid of p6 and p5. Make the top rope a separate fixed rope tied off at both poles. You will have to get a lot of tension (several hundred pounds) to keep the rope from sagging too much, so use a strong cable and a turnbuckle or similar. The lower rope would then also be tied off at 5.

Me personally, I would probably just go p1 to p3 to p2 to p3 to p2 to p3 etc until I had the mechanical advantage I want. Those ropes pulling at angles don’t add as much to the mechanical advantage. However, I see that your way is stable against swinging in one dimension, so that may be important to you.
 
  • Like
Likes Rolacycle
  • #7
P.S.: as it will take a lot of tension to keep the top rope flat you will need strong well anchored posts. You could alleviate that by bracing the tops of the posts apart from each other, but if you are going to do that, why have the top rope at all? Why not make a rigid structure on top?
 
  • Like
Likes Rolacycle and Lnewqban
  • #9
Not sure what other constraints you have, but I would either lean the side posts into meet at the top (that will,probably require taller posts) or replace the rope section joining them with another post.
You only need four pulleys.
Fix P3 to the top centre of the post structure.
Fix one end of the rope directly above the left side of P4. Take it down and under P4, up over pulley P3 and down to P2, as you have it, then almost vertically up to P1, and finally down to the bracket where you will tie it off.
You can offset P1 a bit to the right. Ideally, when the feeder is raised, the rope should make about the same angle to the vertical on each side of P1.
 
  • #10
Cutter Ketch said:
P.S.: as it will take a lot of tension to keep the top rope flat you will need strong well anchored posts. You could alleviate that by bracing the tops of the posts apart from each other, but if you are going to do that, why have the top rope at all? Why not make a rigid structure on top?
Its all one rope so the top rope cannot be independently tensioned. This will be flat only if the other ropes are flat...hence the question "how high do you want to lift the weight" which I ask again.
 
  • Like
Likes Rolacycle
  • #11
haruspex said:
Not sure what other constraints you have, but I would either lean the side posts into meet at the top (that will,probably require taller posts) or replace the rope section joining them with another post.
You only need four pulleys.
Fix P3 to the top centre of the post structure.
Fix one end of the rope directly above the left side of P4. Take it down and under P4, up over pulley P3 and down to P2, as you have it, then almost vertically up to P1, and finally down to the bracket where you will tie it off.
You can offset P1 a bit to the right. Ideally, when the feeder is raised, the rope should make about the same angle to the vertical on each side of P1.
Yeah I actually was thinking just before I read your reply about using separate rope not connected to load/tension then anchor a pulley to independent rope, thus not requiring extra pulleys to center the load. This is variation with extra pulley and rope ending at post not pulley.
50DB5F5D-9377-46D8-82EE-B2E8771868C2.jpeg
50DB5F5D-9377-46D8-82EE-B2E8771868C2.jpeg
 
  • #12
hutchphd said:
Its all one rope so the top rope cannot be independently tensioned. This will be flat only if the other ropes are flat...hence the question "how high do you want to lift the weight" which I ask again.
The higher you pull load the more tension is applied to p6 thus flattening the leg it’s on. And as that gets closer to 180° p2 and p4 get closer to p3. So yes all pulleys will get closer to 180° in relation to pulleys on either side. The maximum height before system passes the center of the load is 15’. So p6 with load fully raised will find center at any length below 14’11”. And I’ve attached a more accurate drawing of pulleys when load is raised. The first pic was more to show where the pulleys need to be to raise load in center, not to accurately show rope lengths and angles created by pulleys.
 

Attachments

  • 697F1FFA-EB37-4BEA-B82F-05B64F86CC79.jpeg
    697F1FFA-EB37-4BEA-B82F-05B64F86CC79.jpeg
    38.3 KB · Views: 357
  • #13
hutchphd said:
Its all one rope so the top rope cannot be independently tensioned. This will be flat only if the other ropes are flat...hence the question "how high do you want to lift the weight" which I ask again.
Like this with 2nd rope, just to set fixed anchor point for top pulley’s. I believe
 

Attachments

  • 06DA4183-43E7-4B35-B0D0-809E7713CFFD.jpeg
    06DA4183-43E7-4B35-B0D0-809E7713CFFD.jpeg
    59.2 KB · Views: 346
  • Like
Likes Cutter Ketch
  • #14
If that is an accurate depiction of the geometry the tension in the rope might need to be hundreds of pounds and the force pulling sideways on the posts will be nearly twice the tension. Can the posts be higher? Or can you put a beam across? This is the same issue you get putting up a hammock with very little "bow"allowed...the tension goes to huge.
 
  • Like
Likes Lnewqban
  • #15
Rolacycle said:
unless there is more efficient way to use the same 6 pulleys and pull load centered between the two poles
This would be my way to use more efficiently 6 pulleys:

pulleys.png

You need two cables (anchored at the yellow points). The 2 top pulleys are connected at the center of the top cable (thus centering the load). The looser the top cable is, the less tension will be in it. The 5 pulleys over the load gives you 5 nearly vertical load carrier (which is what you want) and a sixth one going to the pulley on the pole (##\approx## 45°). This gives you a MA of about 5.7, i.e. you need 18 lb to lift the load. This is about twice as efficient as your arrangement in your OP.

You could also connect the pulled cable to the other pole instead of the top pulley (or top cable). This would reduce the MA (##\approx## 5.4), but might give you more stability as the lower cable will equally pull sideways on either side of the load.
 
  • Like
Likes Rolacycle
  • #16
hutchphd said:
If that is an accurate depiction of the geometry the tension in the rope might need to be hundreds of pounds and the force pulling sideways on the posts will be nearly twice the tension. Can the posts be higher? Or can you put a beam across? This is the same issue you get putting up a hammock with very little "bow"allowed...the tension goes to huge.
The 6:1 mechanical advantage system only requires 16.6 lb force to move 100lb load. And it doesn’t have to get to maximum height/ “little bow” to get +8’ off ground, yes I do understand that closer to maximum height it will get exponentially heavier especially the last few degrees as the rope nears 180°

And I probably could add beam in between but was just going for quick and easy not 100% everything it could possibly be. Just old telephone poles few pulleys and couple screws. But the poles are buried 8’ deep so any horizontal force on them is likely moot, I could probably hit it with my truck and not be enough force to change angle of pole, but point taken
 
Last edited:
  • #17
jack action said:
This would be my way to use more efficiently 6 pulleys:

You need two cables (anchored at the yellow points). The 2 top pulleys are connected at the center of the top cable (thus centering the load). The looser the top cable is, the less tension will be in it. The 5 pulleys over the load gives you 5 nearly vertical load carrier (which is what you want) and a sixth one going to the pulley on the pole (##\approx## 45°). This gives you a MA of about 5.7, i.e. you need 18 lb to lift the load. This is about twice as efficient as your arrangement in your OP.

You could also connect the pulled cable to the other pole instead of the top pulley (or top cable). This would reduce the MA (##\approx## 5.4), but might give you more stability as the lower cable will equally pull sideways on either side of the load.
Yeah I see the flaw of my original concept was single rope, instead of independent top pulley anchor line/ or beam.
 
  • Like
Likes Lnewqban and hutchphd
  • #18
hutchphd said:
Its all one rope so the top rope cannot be independently tensioned. This will be flat only if the other ropes are flat...hence the question "how high do you want to lift the weight" which I ask again.

My P.S. went with my immediately prior post.
 
  • Like
Likes hutchphd and Rolacycle
  • #19
Cutter Ketch said:
I do not think this will work quite the way you want. It would require high tension to keep the rope as flat as it is at p6, but it clearly isn’t that tight as can be seen from the angles at p4 and p2. What will happen is the angles at p6 and p4 and p2 will flatten out more or less together. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, and may constitute some extra mechanical advantage, but it seems overly complicated and unnecessary. Also, if you feel strongly about getting the rope relatively flat at p6 you would need several hundred pounds of tension in the rope at which point the lower rope would also be flat.

It would be easy to make it work the way you want. Why not get rid of p6 and p5. Make the top rope a separate fixed rope tied off at both poles. You will have to get a lot of tension (several hundred pounds) to keep the rope from sagging too much, so use a strong cable and a turnbuckle or similar. The lower rope would then also be tied off at 5.

Me personally, I would probably just go p1 to p3 to p2 to p3 to p2 to p3 etc until I had the mechanical advantage I want. Those ropes pulling at angles don’t add as much to the mechanical advantage. However, I see that your way is stable against swinging in one dimension, so that may be important to you.
The drawings pulley positions were more so I knew it how/where to put pulleys so it’s pull centered. Fully raised 180° rope at p6 would be 15’, and honestly anything over 6’ should be plenty clearance for deer/pigs/cattle. With load raised 7~13’ and weight of load I figured sagging at p6 would add stability

#3 windiest city in USA ...a 30mph wind is a like a Tuesday.
 

Attachments

  • 70632C44-B53D-4F67-96DC-E067D3E7CE7A.png
    70632C44-B53D-4F67-96DC-E067D3E7CE7A.png
    18.7 KB · Views: 348
  • #20
By the way, you can buy a block and tackle on amazon for twenty bucks

8258CDF6-D17D-4239-8B2D-373D19BF6E1B.jpeg
 
  • Like
Likes Rolacycle and hutchphd
  • #21
Rolacycle said:
The 6:1 mechanical advantage system only requires 16.6 lb force to move 100lb load.
Actually the mechanical advantage would be 4:1 (for your original) if all the ropes were vertical (you just count the ropes pulling on the load...I know there are six pulleys...but you need to be careful here.) Because of the angles the tension required is worse=~30lbs as I mentioned previously. As you go up it gets even worse because of angles.
For stability your design makes sense but you must figure how much force you wish to pull and then you can figure how tall the towers need to be worst case. Probably you don't need to worry about side loads (if the posts are rooted as you say.!)
The "two rope" solution may be the way to go...
 
  • Like
Likes FactChecker
  • #22
hutchphd said:
Actually the mechanical advantage would be 4:1 (for your original) if all the ropes were vertical (you just count the ropes pulling on the load...I know there are six pulleys...but you need to be careful here.) Because of the angles the tension required is worse=~30lbs as I mentioned previously. As you go up it gets even worse because of angles.
For stability your design makes sense but you must figure how much force you wish to pull and then you can figure how tall the towers need to be worst case. Probably you don't need to worry about side loads (if the posts are rooted as you say.!)
The "two rope" solution may be the way to go...
4:1 ??
Both sides of rope @ P2/p4/p6 pull upwards from fully lowered position so how’s that 4:1
 
  • #23
Rolacycle said:
4:1 ??
Both sides of rope @ P2/p4/p6 pull upwards from fully lowered position so how’s that 4:1
If you isolate your 100 lb load, you'll notice that only 4 cables are pulling it upward, that is, the load is divided equally between 4 cables (assuming they have the same tension and are all vertical).

If you isolate your p3-p6 assembly, you'll notice that 2 cables are pulling it upward and 2 are pulling it downward. Similarly, you can also say that there are 2 cables pulling it to the left and 2 cables pulling it to the right. That means that they must be pulling equally, both up-and-down and sideways. So the angle between any two cables will be the same as the angle between the cables on the opposite side (i.e all cables will form an 'X' shape).

Assuming all your cables are vertical, they will all carry 25 lb each, the ones on the p3-p6 assembly going one against each other (hence adding nothing the MA).
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes Rolacycle and hutchphd
  • #24
Here is a thought process that I think will convince you of the 4:1 MA.
1) The MA is the ratio between the amount you pull the rope end down and the amount that the height of the weight changes.
2) If the P3 pully was hard-mounted rather than being suspended from P6, then clearly, the ratio of 1) would be 4:1.
3) Since the P3 pully is suspended from P6, the combined length-change of the P6/P3 rope system totals the same as if P3 was hard-mounted. That is, MA = 4:1.
 
Last edited:
  • #25
jack action said:
If you isolate your 100 lb load, you'll notice that only 4 cables are pulling it upward, that is, the load is divided equally between 4 cables (assuming they have the same tension and are all vertical).

If you isolate your p3-p6 assembly, you'll notice that 2 cables are pulling it upward and 2 are pulling it downward. Similarly, you can also say that there are 2 cables pulling it to the left and 2 cables pulling it to the right. That means that they must be pulling equally, both up-and-down and sideways. So the angle between any two cables will be the same as the angle between the cables on the opposite side (i.e all cables will form an 'X' shape).

Assuming all your cables are vertical, they will all carry 25 lb each, the ones on the p3-p6 assembly going one against each other (hence adding nothing the MA).
ok I do see that p6& p3 offset each other in the entire system, but unfortunately when pulling rope you can’t isolate parts of the system.
And no I don’t believe these will pull evenly. Say the load, rope slack and p6/p3 all laying on ground and I start pulling, 4:1 system but it’s using 6:1 rope. Once slack is gone it will raise p6/p3 until slack between p5—->p4 —>p3—>etc pulls load 10’ off ground. That would need 60’ at 6:1 to lift 10’ even tho u pointed out it is 4:1 MA it’s 6:1 in relation to rope length right? Here’s another diagram with more information and fully raised one please don’t judge it too much lol
Anchor 15’
P5 15’
P1 15’

raise p2/p4 10” need 60’ rope. I do believe once slack is out (which will raise) p6/p3 (to to some height, don’t know that it would matter once slack is gone) they will pull evenly, but not before.
043D9584-8653-4C2A-AF02-100B8E92855B.jpeg
9EED287A-F5D3-456A-927D-B6B2F281E359.jpeg
 
Last edited:
  • #27
  • Like
Likes FactChecker
  • #28
Rolacycle said:
but not sure even if I make overhead solid anchor point if it has room to pull slack out.
It's not clear what you mean by "pull slack out".
The separation of the anchors at the top is not essential. As long as you can keep the system from getting tangled up, all the upper anchor points can be together at the central "sagging" point of a cable across the top.

EDIT: I think I understand the slack. This takes some height for the cascade of pulleys.
 
  • Like
Likes Rolacycle
  • #29
FactChecker said:
It's not clear what you mean by "pull slack out".
The separation of the anchors at the top is not essential. As long as you can keep the system from getting tangled up, all the upper anchor points can be together at the central "sagging" point of a cable across the top.

EDIT: I think I understand the slack. This takes some height for the cascade of pulleys.
Slack like unused rope used to raise load. Well it’s a deer feeder and it doesn’t refill itself so load has to be dropped and doing so at 6:1 rope length the amount of rope to lift load makes a lot of slack when is laying on ground. And when u re raise load slack with be pulled out of pulleys in 6,5,4,3,2,1 order thus lifting the p6/3 (1st load) combo before raising the p4/2 (2nd and primary load)

and yes the top doesn’t have to be at perfect 180° plain. But the separated anchor is to keep wind at bay and maintain centeral vertical lifting point. MA is nice but honestly 100lb I could life with no advantage but 4:1 my 12yr old daughter can refill it
 
  • Like
Likes FactChecker
  • #30
I believe that this will be the limit to the effective MA of P6:
When the angle of the ropes running through a pulley are at 0 degrees, the force will be doubled.
When the angle of the running lines is not 0 degrees, the effectiveness of the pulleys is diminished.
When the angle of the running lines reaches 120 degrees, there is no more mechanical advantage in that pulley.

Look for "120-degree rule" here:
https://www.frostburg.edu/faculty/r...s_preppers_chapters/Ch15-PulleySystems_v2.pdf

72E10F43-365F-41E5-B68E-BC09837C680C.png
 
  • Like
Likes Rolacycle
  • #31
Lnewqban said:
I believe that this will be the limit to the effective MA of P6:
When the angle of the ropes running through a pulley are at 0 degrees, the force will be doubled.
When the angle of the running lines is not 0 degrees, the effectiveness of the pulleys is diminished.
When the angle of the running lines reaches 120 degrees, there is no more mechanical advantage in that pulley.

Look for "120-degree rule" here:
https://www.frostburg.edu/faculty/r...s_preppers_chapters/Ch15-PulleySystems_v2.pdf

View attachment 258210
Yes closer to lifting limit height the MA will completely disappear. But once it’s raised and off ground all I have to do is stop pulling it up when it gets heavier
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Lnewqban
  • #32
What you don't seem to appreciate is that (if the pulleys are "frictionless") as soon as the load is off the ground (and static) the tension in all segments of the rope is the same. So your initial diagram is impossible...in particular pulley 6 will be pulled about 5 ft lower when the forces equilibrate (and you will need >30lbs tension to lift it initially and more as you go up). If you need more MA then you need to change the design. What are your requirements?
 
  • #33
Rolacycle said:
Slack like unused rope used to raise load. Well it’s a deer feeder and it doesn’t refill itself so load has to be dropped and doing so at 6:1 rope length the amount of rope to lift load makes a lot of slack when is laying on ground. And when u re raise load slack with be pulled out of pulleys in 6,5,4,3,2,1 order thus lifting the p6/3 (1st load) combo before raising the p4/2 (2nd and primary load)

and yes the top doesn’t have to be at perfect 180° plain. But the separated anchor is to keep wind at bay and maintain centeral vertical lifting point. MA is nice but honestly 100lb I could life with no advantage but 4:1 my 12yr old daughter can refill it
I noticed that the pulley system in post #27 can only raise the weight 1/6 of the total height.
 
  • Like
Likes Rolacycle
  • #34
hutchphd said:
What you don't seem to appreciate is that (if the pulleys are "frictionless") as soon as the load is off the ground (and static) the tension in all segments of the rope is the same. So your initial diagram is impossible...in particular pulley 6 will be pulled about 5 ft lower when the forces equilibrate (and you will need >30lbs tension to lift it initially and more as you go up). If you need more MA then you need to change the design. What are your requirements?
Yes correct. But that only happens after all loads are suspended. And as I pointed out p6/3 is a load and raises1st. Right?

And my requirements are it be stable lifted, withstand moderate to high winds and raise and lower in the middle of poles. I had same 6 pulleys on single pole version but without offset from pole wind and it rubbing pole KO’d rope within 3weeks.
 
  • #35
I don't understand what you mean. Assuming "massless" rope and pulleys and "frictionless" pulleys and that you are lifting slowly: as soon as there is any lifting force on the load (i.e. no slack) the rope geometry is fixed. The other way to say this is that the geometry is the same for any sized load. Obviously as the load moves the geometry changes. But at that initial point the top line is bowed by ~5 ft and the MA suffers as per my estimate. If that MA is sufficient then OK. So what are the requirements? If your design is sufficient (with added stability requirements which this will meet I think) then what is our purpose here?

If you just want to understand better :flashlight: may I suggest you rig this with 10 lbs load and lightweight ropes and play...the physics is the same. Will be glad to provide analysis.
 
<h2>1. What is the difference between a moving pulley and an anchored pulley?</h2><p>A moving pulley is a type of pulley that is attached to a moving object, such as a rope or cable, and is used to lift or move a load. An anchored pulley, on the other hand, is fixed in place and does not move when a load is being lifted.</p><h2>2. What is the mechanical advantage of a moving pulley compared to an anchored pulley?</h2><p>The mechanical advantage of a moving pulley is greater than that of an anchored pulley. This is because a moving pulley allows for a change in direction of the force being applied, which reduces the amount of force needed to lift a load.</p><h2>3. How does the number of pulleys affect the mechanical advantage?</h2><p>The number of pulleys used in a system can affect the mechanical advantage. As the number of pulleys increases, the mechanical advantage also increases. This is because each additional pulley adds an extra change in direction, which reduces the amount of force needed to lift a load.</p><h2>4. Can the mechanical advantage of a moving pulley be increased?</h2><p>Yes, the mechanical advantage of a moving pulley can be increased by adding more pulleys to the system. This is known as a compound pulley system, where multiple pulleys are used to further reduce the amount of force needed to lift a load.</p><h2>5. Are there any limitations to the mechanical advantage of a moving pulley?</h2><p>While a moving pulley can greatly increase the mechanical advantage, there are some limitations. One limitation is the amount of friction in the system, which can reduce the efficiency of the pulley. Another limitation is the weight of the pulley itself, which can add to the overall load being lifted.</p>

1. What is the difference between a moving pulley and an anchored pulley?

A moving pulley is a type of pulley that is attached to a moving object, such as a rope or cable, and is used to lift or move a load. An anchored pulley, on the other hand, is fixed in place and does not move when a load is being lifted.

2. What is the mechanical advantage of a moving pulley compared to an anchored pulley?

The mechanical advantage of a moving pulley is greater than that of an anchored pulley. This is because a moving pulley allows for a change in direction of the force being applied, which reduces the amount of force needed to lift a load.

3. How does the number of pulleys affect the mechanical advantage?

The number of pulleys used in a system can affect the mechanical advantage. As the number of pulleys increases, the mechanical advantage also increases. This is because each additional pulley adds an extra change in direction, which reduces the amount of force needed to lift a load.

4. Can the mechanical advantage of a moving pulley be increased?

Yes, the mechanical advantage of a moving pulley can be increased by adding more pulleys to the system. This is known as a compound pulley system, where multiple pulleys are used to further reduce the amount of force needed to lift a load.

5. Are there any limitations to the mechanical advantage of a moving pulley?

While a moving pulley can greatly increase the mechanical advantage, there are some limitations. One limitation is the amount of friction in the system, which can reduce the efficiency of the pulley. Another limitation is the weight of the pulley itself, which can add to the overall load being lifted.

Similar threads

  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
18
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
879
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
30
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • General Engineering
Replies
5
Views
215
Back
Top