Static Pulley Problem on an Incline

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
9 replies · 3K views
equinom
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
The problem is: Two blocks of mass m and M are connected via pulley with a configuration as shown. The coefficient of static friction is 0.64, between blocks and surface. If the inclined angle is 23deg and M = 3.1kg, what is the maximum mass m so that no sliding occurs?

The question is: I understand how m=0.64(3.1)/(sin23-0.64cos23) but how can I explain the negative mass? Also, when you look at the denominator there is a restriction that theta can't equal 33 degrees. What exactly does that mean?

zCIl5YWzAO2G8HFirJD_Uc-_aNHqSe7VvWfD1JpjHtLTc46wC7RwHQ3dlUjOqIUlNtF8i3BdiRPPuVw1Jayj6cc183mDKfvi.png
 

Attachments

  • zCIl5YWzAO2G8HFirJD_Uc-_aNHqSe7VvWfD1JpjHtLTc46wC7RwHQ3dlUjOqIUlNtF8i3BdiRPPuVw1Jayj6cc183mDKfvi.png
    zCIl5YWzAO2G8HFirJD_Uc-_aNHqSe7VvWfD1JpjHtLTc46wC7RwHQ3dlUjOqIUlNtF8i3BdiRPPuVw1Jayj6cc183mDKfvi.png
    3.5 KB · Views: 746
on Phys.org
You seem to have an error somewhere in your analysis.

Draw a free body diagram for each block (include ALL forces on each block). Then write the equations of motion and set the system acceleration to zero.
 
@equinom I think you calculated the angle that the denominator is less than zero incorrectly. [Editing after further analysis: See below=your calculations are correct]. That angle is around 10 degrees,(I will compute it more precisely momentarily) and what that means is the mass m will stay on the surface without creating any tension in the rope, and won't need the full available frictional force of ## \mu \, mg \cos{\theta} ## to keep it from sliding. Instead the frictional force on block ## m ## will be only ## mg \sin{\theta} ## for angles ## \theta ## of 10 degrees and less. ## \\ ## Edit: Scratch that=your calculation of 33 degrees is correct. What that means is at 23 degrees, its own frictional force, regardless of the value of mass ## m, ## will hold the mass ## m ## in place. Mass ## m ## can be as heavy as you like at 23 degrees. Tension in the rope occurs only for ## \theta>33 ## degrees. The formula you have for the maximum mass ## m ## only applies for angles ## \theta>33 ## degrees. ## \\ ## For ## \theta<33 ## degrees, there is no limit to the maximum ## m ## that you could put there. It would be held in place by its own friction, and wouldn't need the mass ## M ## to help hold it there.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: equinom and haruspex
Dr.D said:
You seem to have an error somewhere in your analysis.

Draw a free body diagram for each block (include ALL forces on each block). Then write the equations of motion and set the system acceleration to zero.
@Dr.D Please see my edited comments of post 3. I think the OP has stumbled on an interesting case where the angle of inclination is sufficiently small, that no sliding occurs, regardless of the value of the mass ## m ##. :)
 
Last edited:
equinom said:
when you look at the denominator there is a restriction that theta can't equal 33 degrees. What exactly does that mean?
It tells you you have made a wrong assumption in obtaining the equation. You did indeed make an assumption... what was it?
 
Charles Link said:
Please see my edited comments of post 3. I think the OP has stumbled on an interesting case where the angle of inclination is sufficiently small, that no sliding occurs, regardless of the value of the mass m m . :)

While this is certainly possible (I have not calculated it), FBDs for the two bodies are still the right place to start.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Charles Link
"For theta<33 degrees, there is no limit to the maximum ## m ## that you could put there. It would be held in place by its own friction, and wouldn't need the mass M to help hold it there.

Hmm, in an extreme case that m=1000kg, how can the friction created by a M=3.1kg block hold it in place. Something doesn't add up? Otherwise, thank-you for your explanation, it definitely makes me think about the problem a little differently.
 
Charles Link said:
@haruspex has a good question for you @equinom in post 5.

Next question is, what is the assumption that I made? Probably that the blocks would move down the incline and that friction would be in the opposite direction. After playing with the equation a bit I get m=μM/(sinθ-μcosθ) and mathematically sinθ-μcosθ≠0 or tanθ≠μ. Is that always true or did I make an incorrect of assumption?
 
equinom said:
Next question is, what is the assumption that I made? Probably that the blocks would move down the incline and that friction would be in the opposite direction. After playing with the equation a bit I get m=μM/(sinθ-μcosθ) and mathematically sinθ-μcosθ≠0 or tanθ≠μ. Is that always true or did I make an incorrect of assumption?
The incorrect assumption is that the frictional force is always ##F_f= \mu \, mg \cos{\theta} ##. When ## \theta=0 ##, the object will rest there freely. Is the frictional force=## \mu \, mg ## for this case? What is the frictional force for ## \theta=0 ##, even though ## \cos(0)=1 ##? (Also see my post 3 again).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: equinom