The last static equilibrium problem.

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a static equilibrium problem related to a product liability lawsuit involving a portable seat for an infant. Participants are analyzing the forces acting on the seat and the child to determine liability based on the forces at play.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the calculations of forces acting on the seat, including the weight of the child and the forces at points A and B. There is a focus on whether the calculated forces exceed the manufacturer's specifications and how this relates to the seat's safety.

Discussion Status

Some participants are questioning the assumptions made in the calculations, particularly regarding the safety of the seat despite the forces being within specified limits. There is an ongoing exploration of the implications of the calculations on the liability of the manufacturer versus the parents.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of the problem's context, including the specified maximum forces at points A and B, and the weight of the child. The discussion reflects uncertainty about the interpretation of these constraints in relation to the outcome of the lawsuit.

akan
Messages
58
Reaction score
0
You have been called on to testify in a product liability lawsuit. An infant sitting in a portable seat that is supported by the edge of a table fell to the floor (see the figure). The manufacturer claims the child was too heavy for the seat, and the parents claim the seat was defective. Testing showed that the seat can withstand the weight of a child when the force at A does not exceed 96.2 N and the force at B does not exceed 229 N. The child has a mass of 10 kg. In whose favor should the judge rule?

http://img370.imageshack.us/img370/5152/rw1264ji6.jpg
http://g.imageshack.us/img370/rw1264ji6.jpg/1/

How do I solve this?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi akan! :smile:

Show us what you've tried, and where you're stuck, and then we'll know how to help. :smile:
 
(x) Sum(F_x) = 0 (no forces)
(y) Sum(F_y) = F_a - F_b - F_child = 0

F_child = mg = 10*9.8 = 98

pivot at B:
(2) Sum(T_z) = F_a * (.22) - F_child (.16) = 0

pivot at C (child):
(3) Sum(T_z) = F_a * (.38) - F_b (.16) = 0

(2) .22 F_a = .16 F_child
(2) F_a = (.16 / .22) F_child = (.16 / .22) (98) = 71.27

(3) (.16 / .22) F_child (.38) = F_b (.16)
(3) F_b = (.38 / .22) F_child = (.38 / .22) (98) = 169.272727

Neither of these exceeds the allowed values, so why is the correct answer "in favor of parents"?
 
judge rules ok!

akan said:
Neither of these exceeds the allowed values, so why is the correct answer "in favor of parents"?
akan said:
You have been called on to testify in a product liability lawsuit. An infant sitting in a portable seat that is supported by the edge of a table fell to the floor (see the figure). The manufacturer claims the child was too heavy for the seat, and the parents claim the seat was defective. Testing showed that the seat can withstand the weight of a child when the force at A does not exceed 96.2 N and the force at B does not exceed 229 N. The child has a mass of 10 kg. In whose favor should the judge rule?

Hi akan! :smile:

I haven't checked your calculations …

but assuming they're correct, that means that the child would have been safe if the seat was well-made.

Since the child wasn't safe, that proves the seat was defective, and so the judge should rule "in favor of parents". :smile:
 
The calculations show that the force did not exceed the specifications. Yeah, I guess that means that it's the manufacturer's fault and the seat was flawed. Thanks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
10K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
5K