MHB Solve Q5 Part II Maths Exam: Normal Reaction Force on C

  • Thread starter Thread starter Needhelp2
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mechanics
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on resolving the normal reaction force on point C in a physics exam question. The user calculated the tension in the string as 2.24N but arrived at a normal reaction force of 5.96N, which differs from the provided solution of 5.26N. A key point raised is the potential neglect of the frictional force at C, which affects the calculations. The correct approach involves resolving forces perpendicular to the plane, where the frictional force does not contribute. Clarification on the question number was also made, confirming it was indeed question 6.
Needhelp2
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
So I have my final maths exam tomorrow and thought I'd do a few new past papers to brush up.

Here is my problem:
Q 5) part ii....

I worked out the tension in the string which was correct at 2.24N, but when I resolved vertically to find out the normal reaction force on C, I came out with 5.96N. In the solutions they resolved perpendicular to the plane and ended up with 5.26N.
My workings were: T+NCos(20)=0.8g

Any ideas on where I went wrong?

Thanks!
 

Attachments

Mathematics news on Phys.org
I have moved this topic, as it is more physics than geometry.

Just to verify, you are actually referring to question 6, correct?
 
Yes! Sorry Q6) part ii (Blush)
 
It looks as though you may be neglecting the frictional force at C, which acts in the direction CB (so as to balance the horizontal component of the normal force at C). If you resolve perpendicular to the rod then the frictional force has no component in that direction.
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Back
Top