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

  • Thread starter Thread starter Needhelp2
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mechanics
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.
 
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...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top