Solving for Masses in an Atwood Machine

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on solving for the masses in an Atwood Machine using principles of mechanics. The user, @Venturi365, correctly applies Newton's Second Law and conservation of mechanical energy to derive the equations for the system, ultimately finding that the total mass is 10 kg and the individual masses are approximately 5.68 kg and 4.32 kg. The conversation clarifies that while the displacement of the masses was not directly needed for the solution, it is important for understanding the system's dynamics. The participants confirm that the approach taken was valid, despite initial doubts about the use of power equations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Newton's Second Law of Motion
  • Conservation of Mechanical Energy
  • Basic algebra for solving systems of equations
  • Understanding of kinematics in constant acceleration scenarios
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of equations for Atwood Machines in classical mechanics
  • Learn about the implications of conservation of energy in dynamic systems
  • Explore the role of displacement in calculating work done in physics
  • Investigate advanced applications of Newton's Laws in multi-body systems
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, educators teaching mechanics, and engineers working on dynamic systems will benefit from this discussion, particularly those focused on understanding the principles of motion and energy conservation in mechanical systems.

Venturi365
Messages
12
Reaction score
3
Homework Statement
An Atwood's machine uses two masses ##m_{1}## and ##m_{2}##. Starting from rest, the velocity of the two masses is ##v=4\,\mathrm{\frac{m}{s}}## after ##3\,\mathrm{s}##. In that instant, the kinetic energy of the system is ##E_{k}=80\,\mathrm{J}## and each one of the masses has moved ##6\,\mathrm{m}##. Calculate the values of ##m_{1}## and ##m_{2}##
Relevant Equations
##P=\frac{E_{k}}{t}##
##P=F\cdot v##
##\sum F=ma##
##E_{k}=\frac{1}{2}mv^{2}##
I've tried to solve this exercise but I haven't used one of the properties of the system (the displacement of the masses) so I don't know if I'm wrong about my procedure.

First of all, we (obviously) know that

$$
P=P
$$

And since we can express the power of a force in two different ways, we can say that:

$$
\frac{E_{k}}{t}=F\cdot v \quad \text{or} \quad \frac{mv^{2}}{2t}=F\cdot v
$$

Since the energy of the system is known and the mass of the system is ##(m_{1}+m_{2})## then:

$$
\begin{split}
\frac{E_{k}}{t}&=\frac{mv^2}{2t}\\
\frac{80}{3}&=\frac{(m_{1}+m_{2})4^{2}}{2\cdot 3}\\
(m_{1}+m_{2})&=\frac{80\cdot 2\cdot 3}{16\cdot 3}\\
m_{1}+m_{2}&=10\,\mathrm{kg}
\end{split}
$$

Applying Newton's Second law we can express the forces on each mass like this:

$$
\begin{split}
w_{1}-T&=m_{1}a\\
T-w_{2}&=m_{2}a
\end{split}
$$

Adding up both equations we get:

$$
\begin{split}
m_{1}g-m_{2}g&=m_{1}a+m_{2}a\\
g(m_{1}-m_{2})&=a(m_{1}+m_{2}\\
(m_{1}+m_{2})a&=g(m_{1}-m_{2})\\
(m_{1}-m_{2}&=\frac{a(m_{1}+m_{2})}{g}\\
m_{1}-m_{2}&=\frac{\frac{4}{3}\cdot10}{9.81}\\
m_{1}-m_{2}&\approx =1.36\,\mathrm{kg}
\end{split}
$$

Now we have a simple system of equations:

$$
\begin{cases}
m_{1}+m_{2}=10\\
m_{1}-m_{2}=1.36
\end{cases}
$$

Solving we get:

$$
\begin{array}{ll}
m_{1}=1.36+m_{2} & m_{1}+4.32=10\\
1.36+m_{2}+m_{2}=10 & m_{1}=10-4.32\\
m_{2}=\frac{10-1.36}{2} & m_{1}=5.68\,\mathrm{kg}\\
m_{2}=4.32\,\mathrm{kg}
\end{array}
$$

So, am I right or did I do something wrong? The only thing that I really doubt about my procedure is the fact that I assume that the net force is ##F=a(m_{1}+m_{2})## but still I'm quite insecure.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Here's the diagram btw

imagen_2023-11-08_144406652.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You cannot use P = E/t since the energy put into the system varies with time. In particular, at t=0 the velocity is zero so P = Fv is zero for both masses.
 
You have already found that ##(m_1+m_2)a=(m_1-m_2)g## where ##a=\frac{4}{3}~##m/s2. That's one equation relating the masses.
Conservation of mechanical energy is a second equation relating the masses.
You have a system of two equations and two unknowns.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: erobz
Orodruin said:
You cannot use P = E/t since the energy put into the system varies with time. In particular, at t=0 the velocity is zero so P = Fv is zero for both masses.
While that is true, and is certainly worth pointing out for future reference, it does not appear that @Venturi365 used ##P=Fv##. Rather, ##\frac 12mv^2=E_k## was used to find the sum of the masses and ##F=ma, a=v/t## were used to find the difference.
kuruman said:
You have already found that ##(m_1+m_2)a=(m_1-m_2)g## where ##a=\frac{4}{3}~##m/s2. That's one equation relating the masses.
Conservation of mechanical energy is a second equation relating the masses.
You have a system of two equations and two unknowns.
Seems to me that is what @Venturi365 did. The question is why the info re the distance moved was not needed. The solution to that is that, assuming constant acceleration, it was redundant: average velocity ##=\frac{u+v}2=\frac st##, ##\frac{0+4}2+\frac 63##.
 
haruspex said:
Seems to me that is what @Venturi365 did.
I agree. The two relevant equations that OP already has are
##m_{1}g-m_{2}g=m_{1}a+m_{2}a##
##m_1+m_2=\dfrac{2\Delta K}{v^2}##.
In this form one can solve the second equation for one of the masses and substitute in the first. The displacements would be needed if the second equation were written in terms of ##h## and ##\Delta U = -80## J. In that case, the speed would not be needed.
 
haruspex said:
While that is true, and is certainly worth pointing out for future reference, it does not appear that @Venturi365 used ##P=Fv##. Rather, ##\frac 12mv^2=E_k## was used to find the sum of the masses and ##F=ma, a=v/t## were used to find the difference.

Seems to me that is what @Venturi365 did. The question is why the info re the distance moved was not needed. The solution to that is that, assuming constant acceleration, it was redundant: average velocity ##=\frac{u+v}2=\frac st##, ##\frac{0+4}2+\frac 63##.
It's right that I started with one statement and ended up forgetting it, I apologise for that. However, this means that I didn't commit any misconception, right?
 
Venturi365 said:
It's right that I started with one statement and ended up forgetting it, I apologise for that. However, this means that I didn't commit any misconception, right?
It appears that you had a misconception, but did not rely on it in your solution.
 
haruspex said:
It appears that you had a misconception

Yeah, you're right about that.

Thank you so much!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
603
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K