Object sliding down a block on a scale

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves a hamster sliding down a frictionless wedge-shaped block that rests on a spring scale. Participants are exploring the forces acting on the hamster and the block, particularly how these forces affect the reading on the scale.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the acceleration of the hamster and its effect on the force exerted on the block and scale. There are attempts to derive the correct expression for the force based on the angle of the wedge.

Discussion Status

Some participants have suggested examining special cases, such as when the angle is zero, to clarify the forces involved. There is recognition of discrepancies in the initial calculations, and participants are questioning the assumptions made in their reasoning.

Contextual Notes

There is an emphasis on understanding the relationship between the forces acting on the hamster and the block, particularly in the context of the block being stationary on the scale despite the hamster's motion.

Lord Anoobis
Messages
131
Reaction score
22

Homework Statement


A 200g hamster sits on an 800 g wedge shaped block which in turn rests on a spring scale. An extra fine lubricating oil is sprayed on the top surface of the block, rendering it entirely frictionless, causing the hamster to slide down. Friction between the block and the scale is large enough that the block does not slip on the scale. What does the scale read as the hamster slides down?

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


The hamster accelerates down the block with a = gsin##\theta##
The vertical component of this acceleration is:

ay = gsin2##\theta##

So the downward force exerted by the hamster on the block and thus onto the scale is

Fhamster = may

I added this to the weight of the block and ended up with

Reading = Mg + mgsin2##\theta##
Reading = (0.800)(9.8) + (0.200)(9.8)sin240o
Reading = 8.650N

Which is incorrect. I feel that I'm on the right track but I've missed some critical detail. Where did I go wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Try a special case. Suppose theta is zero. What do you get for the force the hamster exerts on the block?
 
haruspex said:
Try a special case. Suppose theta is zero. What do you get for the force the hamster exerts on the block?
In that case it would simply be ##mg##
 
Lord Anoobis said:
In that case it would simply be ##mg##
Yes, of course it should be, but is that what you get from your mg sin2θ formula?
 
haruspex said:
Yes, of course it should be, but is that what you get from your mg sin2θ formula?
Indeed not. I can see that mgcos2##\theta## is correct. What I don't see is how to arrive at that.
 
Lord Anoobis said:
Indeed not. I can see that mgcos2##\theta## is correct. What I don't see is how to arrive at that.
Wait.
 
haruspex said:
Yes, of course it should be, but is that what you get from your mg sin2θ formula?
The vertical component of the force the hamster exerts on the block is

F = mgcos2##\theta##

Add this to the weight of the block and there we go.
 
Lord Anoobis said:
The vertical component of the force the hamster exerts on the block is

F = mgcos2##\theta##

Add this to the weight of the block and there we go.
Ok. All good now?
 
haruspex said:
Ok. All good now?
Almost. I would like to look at this a little closer. My initial approach seemed sensible, and I'm not quite sure why it did not work. Logically, that is.
 
  • #10
Lord Anoobis said:
Almost. I would like to look at this a little closer. My initial approach seemed sensible, and I'm not quite sure why it did not work. Logically, that is.
It's because you took the downward acceleration as indicative of the downward force exerted. If you write out the usual ##\Sigma F = ma## equation you'll find you should have negated it.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Lord Anoobis
  • #11
haruspex said:
It's because you took the downward acceleration as indicative of the downward force exerted. If you write out the usual ##\Sigma F = ma## equation you'll find you should have negated it.
Yes, I see that now. I noticed that subtracting that force from the total weight yielded the correct answer but the reason behind it never clicked. Thanks a whole lot.
 

Similar threads

Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
10K
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
8K