• Support PF! Buy your school textbooks, materials and every day products Here!

Seesaw length from pivot

  • Thread starter Tepictoc
  • Start date
  • #1
16
0

Homework Statement


It's a balanced seesaw but the pivot isn't in the exact middle and two weights are on it. One at the very end of each side.
The weight on the left is 4.8 kg.[m1]
The weight on the right is 5.5 kg[m2]
The length of the entire seesaw is 5m
L1 is the distance from the pivot on the left side to the end of the board where m1 is.
Calculate the distance L1 from the pivot when the board is balanced.


Homework Equations


Distance = Torque/force
Sum of all moments = 0

The Attempt at a Solution


m1*g=47.088 N This force is acting counterclockwise
m2*g=53.955 N This force is acting clockwise
The normal force from the pivot is m1g+m2g = 101,043 N

I'll use L2 to identify the length from the pivot to the right end since L1 is the length from pivot to the left end.
53.955*L2 = 47.088*L1

This is where I get stuck when trying to calculate the lengths of L1 and L2.
I could calculate the length of L1 and L2 if I knew the torque by dividing it by the force but it's unknown isn't it?
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
gneill
Mentor
20,792
2,770
How are L1 and L2 related via the total length of the seesaw arm?
 
  • #3
you don't need to know the torque because the torque of the one end of the seesaw should be equal and opposite to the torque of the other just like you have in your one equation. You know that your total length of the seesaw is 5m so set up a second equation and then you have two equations and two unknowns.
 
  • #4
16
0
How are L1 and L2 related via the total length of the seesaw arm?
L1 < L2
The entire length of the seesaw is 5m. In the picture the pivot isn't at 2.5m, it's closer to L1.



you don't need to know the torque because the torque of the one end of the seesaw should be equal and opposite to the torque of the other just like you have in your one equation. You know that your total length of the seesaw is 5m so set up a second equation and then you have two equations and two unknowns.
I don't understand the last part.
Also sorry if I am confusing, English is not my first language.
 
  • #5
gneill
Mentor
20,792
2,770
L1 < L2
The entire length of the seesaw is 5m. In the picture the pivot isn't at 2.5m, it's closer to L1.

Also sorry if I am confusing, English is not my first language.
Write an equation that relates L1, L2, and L, where L is the total length of the seesaw arm.

Hint: If you happened to know what L1 is, how would you determine what L2 is?
 
  • #6
16
0
Write an equation that relates L1, L2, and L, where L is the total length of the seesaw arm.

Hint: If you happened to know what L1 is, how would you determine what L2 is?
L = L1+L2
5 = L1 +L2

If I knew L1 then I would know what L2 is but how do I get L1?
If L1 was 2m then L2 would obviously be 3m.
 
  • #7
haruspex
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
32,758
5,035
L = L1+L2
5 = L1 +L2

If I knew L1 then I would know what L2 is but how do I get L1?
If L1 was 2m then L2 would obviously be 3m.
You have two equations relating L1 and L2, the one in the OP and the one for L1+L2 above. So it's a straightforward problem in simultaneous equations: use one equation, in the form L2= something, to substitute for L2 in the other.
Btw, you've made the arithmetic unnecessarily complicated. Given m1 g L1 = m2 g L2 you can cancel out g.
 
  • #8
16
0
You have two equations relating L1 and L2, the one in the OP and the one for L1+L2 above. So it's a straightforward problem in simultaneous equations: use one equation, in the form L2= something, to substitute for L2 in the other.
Btw, you've made the arithmetic unnecessarily complicated. Given m1 g L1 = m2 g L2 you can cancel out g.
L1+L2 = 5m
4.8L1 = 5.5L2

L2 = 4.8L1
L1+4.8L1 = 5
Am i on the right path? I am not sure what to do next.

Or is this another way to do it?
L1*4.8 = L2*5.5
L1 = 0.872L2
0.872L2+0.872L2 = mg
1.744L2 = mg
L2 = 5.5/1.744 = 3.15
L1 = 0.872*3.15 = 2.74
Actually then the total becomes too high(5.8m)
 
Last edited:
  • #9
gneill
Mentor
20,792
2,770
Rather than plugging in numbers so soon, why not manipulate the variables. You've got two equations:

L1 + L2 = L
m1*L1 = m2*L2

Solve for L1. Then plug the given numbers into the resulting expression.
 
  • #10
16
0
Rather than plugging in numbers so soon, why not manipulate the variables. You've got two equations:

L1 + L2 = L
m1*L1 = m2*L2

Solve for L1. Then plug the given numbers into the resulting expression.
I am pretty sure I understand what you mean but I get stuck after a while again.

L1 = L-L2
m1*L-L2 = m2*L2
4.4*5-L2 = 5.5*L2
22-L2 = 5.5*L2
 
  • #11
SteamKing
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
12,798
1,666
I am pretty sure I understand what you mean but I get stuck after a while again.

L1 = L-L2
m1*L-L2 = m2*L2
4.4*5-L2 = 5.5*L2
22-L2 = 5.5*L2
And how do we solve an equation in one variable? Collecting like terms on one side of the equal sign?

Hint: algebra
 
  • #12
16
0
And how do we solve an equation in one variable? Collecting like terms on one side of the equal sign?

Hint: algebra
Is this correct?

22-L2 = 5.5*L2
22-L2-5.5L2 = 5.5L2-5.5L2
22-6.5L2 = 0
-6.5L2 = 22
6.5L2/6.5 = 22/6.5
L2 = 3.384 m

which means 5-3.384 = 1.616
L1 = 1.6 m
L2 = 3.3 m
 
  • #13
haruspex
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
32,758
5,035
L1+L2 = 5m
4.8L1 = 5.5L2
Yes
L2 = 4.8L1
How did you get that ?!
L1*4.8 = L2*5.5
L1 = 0.872L2
i think you have that backwards
0.872L2+0.872L2 = mg
Where did that come from?
 
  • #14
16
0
Yes
How did you get that ?!

i think you have that backwards

Where did that come from?
I tried using the method to calculate a hanging weight held up by two strings but I realize that's completely wrong here.

I tried solving it with algebra here as suggested:
L1 = L-L2
m1*L-L2 = m2*L2
4.4*5-L2 = 5.5*L2
22-L2 = 5.5*L2
Is this correct?

22-L2 = 5.5*L2
22-L2-5.5L2 = 5.5L2-5.5L2
22-6.5L2 = 0
-6.5L2 = 22
6.5L2/6.5 = 22/6.5
L2 = 3.384 m

which means 5-3.384 = 1.616
L1 = 1.6 m
L2 = 3.3 m
 
  • #15
SteamKing
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
12,798
1,666
Is this correct?

22-L2 = 5.5*L2
22-L2-5.5L2 = 5.5L2-5.5L2
22-6.5L2 = 0
-6.5L2 = 22
6.5L2/6.5 = 22/6.5
L2 = 3.384 m

which means 5-3.384 = 1.616
L1 = 1.6 m
L2 = 3.3 m
22-6.5L2 = 0

should simplify to

6.5L2 = 22
 
  • #16
16
0
22-6.5L2 = 0

should simplify to

6.5L2 = 22
But the answer is correct?

Also Thanks a lot everyone for your help!
 
  • #17
gneill
Mentor
20,792
2,770
I am pretty sure I understand what you mean but I get stuck after a while again.

L1 = L-L2
m1*L-L2 = m2*L2 <--- Why replace L1 when that's what you're looking for? Replace L2 instead.
4.4*5-L2 = 5.5*L2 <--- Uh Oh. Caught out by lack of parentheses. a*(b-c) ≠ a*b - c
22-L2 = 5.5*L2 <--- !
Watch your algebra! If you replace variable "L1" with "L - L2", then if L1 was multiplied by something in the equation then that multiplication distributes over both L and L2. Use parentheses around things that you substitute in order to avoid inadvertently "dropping" operations. So: m1*L1 = m2*L2 ----> m1*(L - L2) = m2*L2.

But as I indicated above, since you're looking for L1, don't substitute it away! Replace L2 instead, leaving you with an equation in just L1.

Also, your 4.8kg seems to have become 4.4kg...
 
  • #18
16
0
Simplifying
4.8L1 = 5.5(5-L2)
4.8L1 = (5 * 5.5-L2 * 5.5)
4.8L1 = (27.5-5.5L2)

Solving
4.8L1 = 27.5 -5.5L2

Divide each side by 4.8.
L = 5.729166667 -1.145833333L2

L1+L2 = 5
5.72-1.14L2 + L2 = 5
 
Last edited:
  • #19
gneill
Mentor
20,792
2,770
Simplifying
4.8L1 = 5.5(5-L2)
Nooooo. You've replaced L2 with (5 - L2). That can't be right.

It really would be better to work with just the symbols until the very end. Use the symbols.

So, what's L2 in terms of L and L2?
 
  • #20
16
0
nooooo. You've replaced l2 with (5 - l2). That can't be right.

It really would be better to work with just the symbols until the very end. Use the symbols.

So, what's l2 in terms of l and l2?
L2 = L-L1

4.8L1=5.5(L-L1)
and then I'm not sure.
 
  • #21
gneill
Mentor
20,792
2,770
l2 = l-l1

4.8l1=5.5(l-l1)
Lower case L's are confusing with the fonts used here. Best stick to upper case L's.

No numbers! Use symbols. That 4.8 is m1. That 5.5 is m2. Otherwise, looks better :smile:

Continue...
 
  • #22
16
0
lower case l's are confusing with the fonts used here. Best stick to upper case l's.

No numbers! Use symbols. That 4.8 is m1. That 5.5 is m2. Otherwise, looks better :smile:

Continue...
L2 = L-L1

m1L1 = m2(L-L1)
m1L1 = m2*L - m2*L1
m1L1 = m2L - m2L1
 
  • #23
gneill
Mentor
20,792
2,770
L2 = L-L1

m1L1 = m2(L-L1)
m1L1 = m2*L - m2*L1
m1L1 = m2L - m2L1
Good so far. Can you isolate L1? Hint: first move all the terms containing L1 to the left hand side.
 
  • #24
16
0
Good so far. Can you isolate L1? Hint: first move all the terms containing L1 to the left hand side.
m1L1 = m2L - m2L1
Moving all L1s to the left
m1L1+m2L1 = m2L

I don't know how to isolate L1.
Do I divide both sides by m2?
 
  • #25
gneill
Mentor
20,792
2,770
m1L1 = m2L - m2L1
Moving all L1s to the left
m1L1+m2L1 = m2L

I don't know how to isolate L1.
Do I divide both sides by m2?
No, factor L1 out of the terms on the left. Basic algebra!
 

Related Threads on Seesaw length from pivot

Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
49K
Replies
7
Views
19K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
916
  • Last Post
5
Replies
121
Views
29K
  • Last Post
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
16
Views
10K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
5K
Top