Problem with rotational torque and angular acceleration

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem involving rotational torque and angular acceleration, specifically focusing on the calculations related to tensions in a system of hanging masses and a grinding wheel. The original poster has made progress on part A but is encountering difficulties with part B, particularly in determining the correct tensions and acceleration values.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are exploring the relationships between torque, tension, and acceleration, with some questioning the assumptions made regarding the direction of acceleration and the consistency of sign conventions. There is an emphasis on the need for clarity in the setup of equations and the implications of using different acceleration values.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing guidance on the importance of free body diagrams and the correct application of acceleration values. There is an ongoing examination of the sign conventions used in the calculations, and some participants are reflecting on the implications of their choices.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of confusion regarding the acceleration values and their impact on the tension calculations. Participants are also addressing the need for explicit direction choices in their equations, which may affect the overall understanding of the problem.

Loopas
Messages
55
Reaction score
0
I've attached a screenshot of this particular question. I was able to figure out part A but I'm having some difficulty with part B.

Relevant equations:

T = I*alpha
I = .5mr^2 (for a solid cylinder like the grinding wheel)
F = ma

Attempt at solution:

I've gotten as far as setting up the equation and solving for Tf.

(T1-T2)(r) - Tf = (.5)(m)(r)(a)

So Tf = (T1-T2)(r) - (.5)(m)(r)(a)

Which gives me .01878 Nm, which rounds to .019 Nm.

For the acceleration, I've been using .28/6.7 = .04179 m/s^2
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.jpg
    Untitled.jpg
    18.7 KB · Views: 446
Physics news on Phys.org
Consider a free body diagram for each of the hanging masses to get the tensions T1 and T2.
 
How are you calculating the tensions in part B? They will not be the same as in part A, because the acceleration is different. Pls post all your working for part B.
 
Ok, I think my problem was caused by using the wrong acceleration to calculate the tensions. I get that the system should have the same acceleration, so using a = .28/6.7 universally:

(T1-T2)(r) - Tf = (.5)(m)(r)(a)
(1.2g-6.5a)(r) - Tf = (.5)(m)(r)(a)
(11.76 - .27)(.049) - Tf = (.5)(.8)(.049)(.042)
.56 - Tf = .00082
Tf = .56 Nm
 
You might want to check if you plugged in the correct sign for your acceleration.
 
Since the the acceleration is negative, that should mean that Tf is negative as well?
 
I think you already took into account the negative direction of the friction torque when you wrote a minus sign in front of the friction torque in your first equation in post #4.
 
How do you know that the acceleration should have a negative sign convention?
 
The choice of positive direction is up to you and should be made explicit at the very beginning of setting up the equations. I had to guess what direction you are taking as positive by examining your equations. From the left hand side of the first equation in post #4 it appears to me that you are taking positive direction to be the way the heavier mass tries to accelerate the system. But you are given that when you give the system an initial velocity in this positive direction, it slows down rather than speeds up.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
  • #10
So it's pretty much keeping the sign convention consistent. Thanks!
 
  • #11
Yes. Good work.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
7K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K