Reaction force of freely rotating rod

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around solving a problem involving a homogenous rod that rotates freely around one end, specifically finding the reaction force based on its position. Participants suggest starting by calculating the force at the fixed point due to gravity and the rod's movement. They emphasize that if zero movement is assumed, the reaction force can be simplified to a function of the rod's position, but incorporating angular velocity is crucial for a more accurate solution. The conversation highlights the challenge of accounting for dynamic forces without assuming zero movement. Overall, the focus is on developing a method to calculate the reaction force effectively.
rruben
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hi guys!

I'm working some problems for our exam in a few weeks and there are a few problems we are unable to solve.

One of them is: "A homogenous rod is free to rotate without friction around one of it's ends. Find the reaction force in function of the position of the rod."

As you can see the question is very vague, we've tried to do something with Euler's angles and equations of motion but cannot get to a solution. Any input or help would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Maybe you should calculate the force on the fixed point due to gravity and movement of the rod. If you can assume zero movement, it is just a function of the position, otherwise the angular velocity is relevant, too.
 
We think that may be right but the difficulty is how to go about something like this, not assuming zero movement of course.
 
Calculate it with zero movement, add the centripetal force.
 

Thread 'Is calling fictitious forces "not real" just about terminology?'

Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
View full post »

Thread 'Derivation of Hamilton's Principle: Questions'

I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
View full post »

Similar threads

I Mechanics of an inertial balance
Replies
6
Views
1K
I Statics: When the reactions depend on the displacements
Replies
35
Views
4K
Me, A Rod and A Table With Little Friction
Replies
9
Views
2K
Why Is the Reaction Force Inclined in One Case but Perpendicular in Another?
Replies
3
Views
2K
What happens to a spinning rod with a ball inside?
Replies
1
Views
1K
Moment reaction with rotation and offset CG
Replies
3
Views
2K
Analyzing Action-Reaction between Two Masses in Rotation
Replies
7
Views
2K
Is a reaction moment/force created in off-center constrained rotation?
Replies
6
Views
5K
1 pulley with mass, 1 mass on the cord, 1 external force, no gravity
Replies
16
Views
3K
How Does Torque Apply to a Rotating Rod on a Frictionless Surface?
Replies
4
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top