Calculating Moment of Inertia for an 80kg Plank on Two Workers' Shoulders

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the moment of inertia for an 80kg plank held by two workers, with one worker letting go. Two methods were used to arrive at different moment of inertia values: Method 1 yielded 161 kgm², while Method 2 resulted in 230 kg/m². Method 1 is based on torque and angular acceleration, while Method 2 employs integration but assumes uniform mass distribution, which is not applicable here. The consensus is that without knowing the mass distribution of the plank, Method 2 cannot be reliably used. Accurate moment of inertia calculations require specific mass distribution information.
jono90one
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
I have a question but got two different answers by two different methods. The question:
"Two workers are holding an 80kg plank, one worker let's go. The weight is carried by 55% of the first worker. It is 2.5m long and no uniform. The angular acceleration is 5.5 rads/s^2, what is the moment of inertia of the plank about the axis perpendicular to the beam at the end held by the worker."

Method 1:
τ = F x r [1] (F=mg, r=2.5 x 0.45)
τ = Iα [2]
[1]=[2]
I = 161 kgm^2

Method 2:
I = ∑mx^2/l .δx between -0.45l and 0.55l
lim δx => 0
I = ∫mx^2/l .dx between -0.45l and 0.55l
I = 2060ml^2/8000
I = 128.75 kg/m^2
Using parallel axis theorem:
I = I1 +md^2
I = 128.75 + 80(0.45x2.5)^2
=230 kg/m^2

I do not know which method is the correct one, but unsure why the other would be wrong.

Can someone help me?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your first method looks good. Can you explain what you were doing in your second method?
 
Thanks for the responce, well from what i ahve been taught, i can work out the moment of inertia via integration. Though I am not 100% sure whether i can use the exact same method of the mass isn't uniform.

But the basis of the second method is work out the mass of a small piece = (m/l) δx

Then Moment of Inertia = ∑mr^2 = ∑((m/l)δx)x^2 with the appropriate limits of integration (that are in terms of l, hence l's cancle to give an l^2 term)

Then lim δx -> 0 that becomes dx and ∑ becomes ∫

Can this method not be used in this circumstance?
 
jono90one said:
Can this method not be used in this circumstance?
No, since it assumes a uniform distribution of mass.
 
Oh ok, just out of interest, is there a method with integration for this circumstance?
 
jono90one said:
Oh ok, just out of interest, is there a method with integration for this circumstance?
No, not that I can see. You'd need to know how the mass was distributed.
 
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...

Similar threads

Back
Top