Pulleys with inertia and friction

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a physics problem involving pulleys with inertia and friction. The original poster seeks to determine the mass required to accelerate a given mass upward while accounting for the effects of friction in the pulley bearings and the inertia of the pulleys themselves. The problem involves multiple variables, including the masses of the objects and pulleys, their radii, and the friction torques.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the relationships between tensions in the system and the torques acting on the pulleys. There are attempts to derive equations for the tensions and to relate them to the forces acting on the masses. Questions arise regarding the effects of pulley motion and the implications of including inertia and friction in the calculations.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on the validity of the equations being used and have engaged in discussions about the implications of the inertia of the pulleys. There is an acknowledgment of the complexity introduced by the pulleys' motion and the need to consider both linear and rotational dynamics. Multiple interpretations of the relationships between the variables are being explored.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of considering the effects of friction and inertia in the calculations, as well as the relationships between the accelerations of the masses and the pulleys. There is a recognition that the problem may involve more equations than necessary, but this is seen as potentially beneficial for understanding the dynamics at play.

johnschmidt
Messages
12
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



http://essbaum.com/images/Pulley_diagram.png

We have a bonus question where we are asked to find the mass of ##m_{1}## necessary to accelerate ##m_{2}## upward at ##1g##, and we have to include friction in the pulley bearings as well as the pulley inertias. The pulleys are flat disks, and the rope doesn't have mass or stretch.

##m_{2}## = 1kg
##a_{2}## = 1g (positive is upward)
##r_{p1}## (radius of pulley 1) = 10cm
##m_{p1}## (mass of pulley 1) = 1kg
##\tau_{frictionofp1}## (friction torque of pulley 1 bearing) = 0.4Nm
##r_{p2}## (radius of pulley 2) = 20cm
##m_{p2}## (mass of pulley 2) = 2kg
##\tau_{frictionofp2}## (friction torque of pulley 2 bearing) = 0.6Nm

Homework Equations



Torque ##\tau_{3}## is associated with tension ##T_{3}## and torque ##\tau_{2}## is associated with tension ##T_{2}##
##I## = moment of inertia
##\alpha## = angular acceleration

The Attempt at a Solution



First I solve the torques of pulley 2:

##\tau_{2} - \tau_{3} = I_{p2} \alpha_{p2} + \tau_{friction of p2}##
##T_{2} r_{p2} - T_{3} r_{p2} = \frac{m_{p2} r_{p2}^2}{2} \frac{a_{2}}{r_{p2}} + \tau_{frictionofp2}##
##T_{2} - T_{3} = \frac{m_{p2} a{2}}{2} + \tau_{frictionofp2}##

Now solve for ##T_{3}##

##T_{3} = m_{2} g + m_{2} a_{2}##

Substituting ##T_{3}## into the previous equation gives

##T_{2} - m_{2} g - m_{2} a_{2} = \frac{m_{p2} a{2}}{2} + \tau_{frictionofp2}##

Solve for ##T_{2}##

##T_{2} = m_{2} g + m_{2} a_{2} + \frac{m_{p2} a{2}}{2} + \tau_{frictionofp2}##

Great! Now I have ##T_{2}## in terms of known variables.

But now I get stuck. How do I proceed with pulley 1? I can follow the same procedure as above and find the difference between ##T_{1}## and ##T_{2}##, but that seems to neglect that pulley 1 is in motion downward.

Similarly if I solve for the forces on pulley 1 (for example ##T_{1} + T_{2} = \left(m_{1} + m_{p1}\right) g - \left(m_{1} + m_{p1}\right) a_{1}## then I am ignoring the forces that go into rotating the inertia of pulley 1...

?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
johnschmidt said:
##T_{2} - T_{3} = \frac{m_{p2} a{2}}{2} + \tau_{frictionofp2}##
Shouldn't there be a denominator 1/rp2 in the last term?
How do I proceed with pulley 1? I can follow the same procedure as above and find the difference between ##T_{1}## and ##T_{2}##, but that seems to neglect that pulley 1 is in motion downward.

Similarly if I solve for the forces on pulley 1 (for example ##T_{1} + T_{2} = \left(m_{1} + m_{p1}\right) g - \left(m_{1} + m_{p1}\right) a_{1}## then I am ignoring the forces that go into rotating the inertia of pulley 1...

?
Both equations are valid. Taking moments about the centre of pulley 1 gives you the torque equation, T1 and T2 acting oppositely, while linear momentum gives an equation with T1 and T2 acting together. Do you think that gives you too many equations?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
haruspex said:
Shouldn't there be a denominator 1/rp2 in the last term?

Yes! Good catch.

Both equations are valid. Taking moments about the centre of pulley 1 gives you the torque equation, T1 and T2 acting oppositely, while linear momentum gives an equation with T1 and T2 acting together. Do you think that gives you too many equations?

I guess one shouldn't complain about having too many equations ;-)

Ok, then let's solve for T1 in terms of T2.

##\tau_{1} - \tau_{2} = I_{p1} \alpha_{p1} + \tau_{friction of p1}##
##T_{1} r_{p1} - T_{2} r_{p1} = \frac{m_{p1} r_{p1}^2}{2} \frac{a_{1}}{r_{p1}} + \tau_{frictionofp1}##
##T_{1} - T_{2} = \frac{m_{p1} a_{1}}{2} + \frac{\tau_{frictionofp1}}{r_{p1}}##

Solve for ##T_{1}##

##T_{1} = T_{2} + \frac{m_{p1} a_{1}}{2} + \frac{\tau_{frictionofp1}}{r_{p1}}##

Insert ##T_{2}##

##T_{1} = m_{2} g + m_{2} a_{2} + \frac{m_{p2} a_{2}}{2} + \frac{\tau_{frictionofp2}}{r_{p2}} + \frac{m_{p1} a_{1}}{2} + \frac{\tau_{frictionofp1}}{r_{p1}}##

Now I also know that ##T_{1} + T_{2} = \left(m_{1} + m_{p1}\right) g - \left(m_{1} + m_{p1}\right) a_{1}##

Solve for ##m_{1}##

##m_{1} = \frac{T_{1} + T_{2}}{g - a_{1}} - m_{p1}##

Insert ##T_{1}## and ##T_{2}##

##m_{1} = \frac{m_{2} g + m_{2} a_{2} + \frac{m_{p2} a_{2}}{2} + \frac{\tau_{frictionofp2}}{r_{p2}} + \frac{m_{p1} a_{1}}{2} + \frac{\tau_{frictionofp1}}{r_{p1}} + m_{2} g + m_{2} a_{2} + \frac{m_{p2} a_{2}}{2} + \frac{\tau_{frictionofp2}}{r_{p2}}}{g - a_{1}} - m_{p1}##

Simplify a bit

##m_{1} = \frac{2 m_{2} g + 2 m_{2} a_{2} + m_{p2} a_{2} + \frac{2 \tau_{frictionofp2}}{r_{p2}} + \frac{m_{p1} a_{1}}{2} + \frac{\tau_{frictionofp1}}{r_{p1}}}{g - a_{1}} - m_{p1}##

I also know that ##a_{1} = \frac{a_{2}}{2}## and can insert that in

##m_{1} = \frac{2 m_{2} g + 2 m_{2} a_{2} + m_{p2} a_{2} + \frac{2 \tau_{frictionofp2}}{r_{p2}} + \frac{m_{p1} \frac{a_{2}}{2}}{2} + \frac{\tau_{frictionofp1}}{r_{p1}}}{g - \frac{a_{2}}{2}} - m_{p1}##

Simplify some more

##m_{1} = \frac{4 m_{2} \left(g + a_{2}\right) + 2 m_{p2} a_{2} + \frac{4 \tau_{frictionofp2}}{r_{p2}} + \frac{m_{p1} a_{2}}{2} + \frac{2 \tau_{frictionofp1}}{r_{p1}}}{2g - a_{2}} - m_{p1}##

Is that right?

It seems to make sense, in that if I zero the mass and friction of the pulleys I get the same equation we had to solve for in another exercise where the pulleys had no mass or friction. And it makes sense that the friction of pulley 2 matters double versus the friction of pulley 1 because of the multiplying effect of pulley 1. But is it right that the inertia of pulley 2 matters 4 times as much as the inertia of pulley 1?
 
johnschmidt said:
is it right that the inertia of pulley 2 matters 4 times as much as the inertia of pulley 1?
Yes. P2 rotates twice as fast as P1, so exerts twice the retardation. But it also has a 2:1 mechanical advantage. Another way to think of it is the P2 rotating twice as fast will gain 4 times the energy.
I agree with you final equation.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
haruspex said:
Yes. P2 rotates twice as fast as P1, so exerts twice the retardation. But it also has a 2:1 mechanical advantage. Another way to think of it is the P2 rotating twice as fast will gain 4 times the energy.
I agree with you final equation.

Ok, I think I understand. This is like where energy is a function of velocity squared, right?

Thanks haruspex!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
553
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
5K