Pulling a rope on a wall, finding gamma

In summary, the homework statement was to find the coordinate direction angle γ of the resultant force acting at B. The first part was to find magnitude of F\underline{}b. The next part was finding the other coordinate directions. I found all but gamma. I don't know how gamma is wrong but the rest are correct. My correct numbers (rounded from the website): F\underline{}B = 78.9 lb, \alpha = 35.4°, \beta = 68.8°. I get ##F_B = 110 lb##. Could you show some of your working so we can see where you went wrong?
  • #1
Bluestribute
194
0

Homework Statement


Determine coordinate direction angle γ of the resultant force acting at B.
Hibbler.ch2.p97.jpg



Homework Equations


Cos[itex]\gamma[/itex] = F[itex]\underline{}z[/itex]/F


The Attempt at a Solution


The first part was to find magnitude of F[itex]\underline{}b[/itex]. The next part was finding the other coordinate directions. I found all but gamma. I don't know how gamma is wrong but the rest are correct. My correct numbers (rounded from the website):

F[itex]\underline{}B[/itex] = 78.9 lb
[itex]\alpha[/itex] = 35.4°
[itex]\beta[/itex] = 68.8°

Why won't the same method work for finding [itex]\gamma[/itex] (the method being the equation up there)? I keep getting 63.1°.

Components of F[itex]\underline{}B[/itex]: <69.30 , 28.55 , 35.75>
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Your ##\alpha## and ##\beta## angles make sense. That is not the correct magnitude of the force at ##B##.

I get ##F_B = 110 lb##. Could you show some of your working so we can see where you went wrong?
 
  • #3
That's weird because, except for rounding, it said my answers were correct (btw, gamma was 117° and I don't know how . . . ).

uF[itex]_{}c[/itex] = (6/14)i + (12/14)j + (4/14)k
F[itex]_{}c[/itex] * 50 (the force) = 21.45i + 42.85j + 14.30k

F[itex]_{}a[/itex] I did the same, but got this overall vector:
42.85i - 14.30j + 21.45k It had a negative j because it's left of the point "B" in the picture, on the y axis.

Then I added those to get the resultant F[itex]_{}B[/itex] vector, 64.30i + 28.55j +35.75k. Finding the magnitude (root of the squares) gets me 78.92, which is correct on the website . . .
 
  • #4
Hmm i seem to be getting :

##F_B = \{90 \hat i + 40 \hat j - 50 \hat k \} N##

How are you getting ##\vec F_A## and ##\vec F_C##? You should be finding position vectors ##\vec r_A## and ##\vec r_C##, which you then normalize to obtain unit vectors ##\vec u_A## and ##\vec u_C##.

You can then express the forces ##\vec F_A## and ##\vec F_C## in terms of the unit vectors.

Also, you should list the question as stated in the book with all the relevant variables. I'm sure magnitudes for ##F_A## and ##F_C## have already been provided.
 
  • #5
Yes they are 50 lb. I thought I was posting a continuation of a problem. Forgot it was different!

I'm using the coordinates in the picture. You can see in my Fc equation what my position and magnitude were based solely off the picture.
 
  • #6
Well If you have them as ##50 lb## each:

##\vec F_A = F_A \vec u_A = \{ \frac{300}{7} \hat i + \frac{100}{7} \hat j - \frac{150}{7} \hat k \} N##

##\vec F_C = F_C \vec u_C = \{ \frac{150}{7} \hat i + \frac{300}{7} \hat j - \frac{100}{7} \hat k \} N##

I get the same vectors as you. So I'm assuming your ##F_B## is correct now that we have the magnitudes of ##F_A## and ##F_C##.

All you would need to do is use the coordinate angle relationship now to find the three angles.
 
Last edited:
  • #7
Right. And I did to get alpha and beta. Gamma gave me 63 I believe. Gamma was 117 and I don't know how they calculated that since I used the same numbers and same procedure to get alpha and beta (which were correct).

Is there a special way to know when the angle you get needs to be subtracted from 180 (I got 63, the website got 117, 180 - 63 = 117)?
 
  • #8
Bluestribute said:
Right. And I did to get alpha and beta. Gamma gave me 63 I believe. Gamma was 117 and I don't know how they calculated that since I used the same numbers and same procedure to get alpha and beta (which were correct).

Is there a special way to know when the angle you get needs to be subtracted from 180 (I got 63, the website got 117, 180 - 63 = 117)?

Ask yourself which way ##\vec F_{B_z}## points. You should find this changes your answer to ##117 °##.
 
  • #9
I could ask myself that and still not know . . . I can't imagine gamma being obtuse until maybe I see an example probably . . .
 
  • #10
Bluestribute said:
I could ask myself that and still not know . . . I can't imagine gamma being obtuse until maybe I see an example probably . . .

What do you mean? Just observing the drawing indicates a net downward force in the ##z## direction at ##B##.
 
  • #11
So if it's going down the Z axis, it's going to be an obtuse angle for gamma?
 
  • #12
I wind up computing ##\cos^{-1}(\frac{- 35.71}{78.9})##. The ##z## component of ##B## points downwards.
 
  • #13
Alright, I think I see where I went wrong. This has been way more helpful than class.
 

1. How do you pull a rope on a wall to find gamma?

To pull a rope on a wall and find gamma, you will need to use a pulley system. First, attach one end of the rope to an object on the wall. Then, thread the rope through a pulley attached to the wall and back down to the ground. Finally, pull down on the other end of the rope to lift the object and determine the force needed to move it, which can be used to calculate gamma.

2. What is the purpose of pulling a rope on a wall to find gamma?

The purpose of pulling a rope on a wall to find gamma is to measure the coefficient of friction, or the amount of force needed to move an object on a surface. This is important in understanding the forces at play in various mechanical systems, such as pulley systems or inclined planes.

3. How is gamma calculated from pulling a rope on a wall?

Gamma can be calculated by dividing the force applied to the rope by the weight of the object being lifted. This will give you the coefficient of friction, which is represented by the Greek letter gamma (γ). It is important to note that this calculation assumes a constant force and a stationary object, so additional factors may need to be taken into account for more accurate measurements.

4. What are some real-world applications of pulling a rope on a wall to find gamma?

Pulling a rope on a wall to find gamma has many real-world applications. For example, it can be used to understand the forces involved in rock climbing or pulling objects up a hill. It is also useful in engineering and design to determine the most efficient way to move objects or design structures.

5. Are there any limitations to using the rope-pulling method to find gamma?

Yes, there are some limitations to using the rope-pulling method to find gamma. This method assumes a constant force and a stationary object, which may not always be the case in real-world situations. Additionally, the surface and weight of the object being pulled may affect the coefficient of friction, so it is important to consider these factors when interpreting the results.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
978
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
11
Views
9K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
1
Views
612
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
11
Views
2K
Back
Top