Motion of 2 masses connected by a rod to a pendulum

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on analyzing the equilibrium of a system consisting of two masses connected by a massless rod, suspended from a pendulum. Participants emphasize the importance of considering forces and torques, highlighting that tensions in the rod do not contribute to equilibrium. The equilibrium condition is suggested to be achievable only when the pendulum is vertical or in a specific dynamic state. Additionally, the symmetry of the system allows for simplifications in deriving equations without relying on torques. Ultimately, the consensus is that the system's balance is maintained regardless of the joint's position on the lower rod, as long as the pendulum remains vertical.
Jenny Physics
Messages
111
Reaction score
4
Homework Statement
Find the equation of motion for the system of two masses connected by a massless rod hanging from a pendulum swinging from left to right and back. Use Newton's second law in terms of forces (not in terms of torques).
Relevant Equations
x and y forces
balance.png

I am not sure which other forces I should consider besides those 3. I cannot consider tensions due to the massless rod on the masses since those will not add up to zero.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Jenny Physics said:
Homework Statement:: Find the equilibrium of forces condition for the system of two masses connected by a massless rod hanging from a pendulum.
Homework Equations:: x and y equilibrium of forces

View attachment 255197
I am not sure which other forces I should consider besides those 3. I cannot consider tensions due to the massless rod on the masses since those will not add up to zero.
Is the problem statement exactly as given to you?
Did the diagram come with it or is that your own interpretation?
It is hard to see how it could be in equilibrium unless the pendulum is vertical... unless it is a dynamic equilibrium, e.g. with the pendulum describing a cone about the vertical.
 
  • Like
Likes Jenny Physics
haruspex said:
Is the problem statement exactly as given to you?
Did the diagram come with it or is that your own interpretation?
It is hard to see how it could be in equilibrium unless the pendulum is vertical... unless it is a dynamic equilibrium, e.g. with the pendulum describing a cone about the vertical.
You are right, this was a misunderstanding. I edited the question.
 
Jenny Physics said:
You are right, this was a misunderstanding. I edited the question.
I assume the upper rod joins the lower rod at its mid point.
In principle, you would use torque there to figure out the equations, but by symmetry you don't need to. Think whether the behaviour of the upper rod depends at all on the length of the lower rod. What difference would it make to that if it were shrunk to zero?
 
  • Like
Likes Jenny Physics
haruspex said:
I assume the upper rod joins the lower rod at its mid point.
In principle, you would use torque there to figure out the equations, but by symmetry you don't need to. Think whether the behaviour of the upper rod depends at all on the length of the lower rod. What difference would it make to that if it were shrunk to zero?
It doesn't depend on the length of the lower rod only because of the symmetry. But what if the pendulum were not attached right at the middle of the lower rod? How could I derive the equations without using torques?
 
Jenny Physics said:
It doesn't depend on the length of the lower rod only because of the symmetry. But what if the pendulum were not attached right at the middle of the lower rod? How could I derive the equations without using torques?
It is provably impossible.
Consider the pendulum rod vertical and the other horizontal, all stationary. Forces alone say all is in balance, regardless where the joint is.
 
  • Like
Likes Jenny Physics
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top