Three hanging masses and two pulleys, why does m3 accelerate?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves three hanging masses connected by massless strings over two massless, frictionless pulleys. The original poster seeks to understand the acceleration of the 4.0 kg mass (m3) despite it appearing to be in equilibrium.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to explain the acceleration of m3 intuitively after deriving its acceleration mathematically. Some participants question the equilibrium state of the system and explore scenarios where m1 and m2 are equal or where m1 is massless. Others suggest considering the effects of forces acting on the system and how they influence acceleration.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively exploring different interpretations of the problem and discussing the implications of various assumptions. Some have provided insights into the dynamics of the system, while others are still seeking clarity on the underlying principles.

Contextual Notes

There is a lack of explicit consensus on the explanation for m3's acceleration, and the original poster notes that there is no answer key for part (b) of the problem. Participants are navigating through conceptual challenges related to equilibrium and forces.

goraemon
Messages
65
Reaction score
4

Homework Statement



Figure CP7.57 shows three hanging masses connected by massless strings over two massless, frictionless pulleys.

a) Suppose: m1 = 2.5 kg, m2 = 1.5 kg, and m3 = 4.0 kg. Find the acceleration of each.

b) The 4.0 kg mass would appear to be in equilibrium. Explain why it accelerates.

Homework Equations



Tension of Rope A = 4*m1*m2*m3*g / (4*m1*m2 + m2*m3 + m1*m3)

The Attempt at a Solution



I managed to solve a) using the above equation which I derived thru some lengthy algebra (5 equations involving 5 unknowns -- a1, a2, a3, Tension of Rope A, and Tension of Rope B), and got the following answers: a1 = -2.21m/s^2, a2 = 2.85m/s^2, and a3 = -0.316m/s^2. These answers match up with the answer key.

But I'm kind of stuck at part (b) -- even though I worked out mathematically in part (a) that box 3 does indeed accelerate, I'm unsure how to explain why it accelerates in a way that makes intuitive sense. There was no answer key for part (b), so I'd appreciate any helpful guidance. I've attached a picture illustration of the problem as well.
 

Attachments

  • physics.jpg
    physics.jpg
    15.1 KB · Views: 2,662
Physics news on Phys.org
Were m1 and m2 equal, the system should stay still, since m1 is heavier it pulls on the cord, adding momentum to the smaller pulley system and breaking the equilibrium state between m1, m2 and m3. It has been a long day, though, I haven't run any numbers, just an intuitive guess.
 
Oh...thanks for posting lendav_rott. I think I might have gotten this. Just now, I imagined an extreme case in which m1 was massless, and m2 = m3. Well m2 would accelerate right down without any resistance, and due to this m3 would also accelerate right down. So, going back to this problem, m3 accelerates because m1 and m2 are not in equilibrium, so even though m1 + m2 = m3, the force pulling upward on m3 is less than m1 + m2. Does that sound right?
 
Newtons laws don't work very well in non inertial frames. As a thought experiment, consider a block m1 resting on another block m2. There is no friction between blocks m1 and m2 or between the floor and m2. Now apply a horizontal pull force T to the lower block, and an equal but opposite force T to the top block. While there is no acceleration of the center of mass of the system, the blocks each accelerate separately. They do not remain at rest.
 
Let me drop a coin in the hat as well: Hold B fixed for a moment.
The center of gravity of m1 and m2 is accelerating downwards. You can calculate that a, and it must be the resultant from g(m1+m2) - tension in AB . So tension in AB < gm3. Now let go of B: acceleration again. m1+m2 accelerated upwards so a new balance equation is needed - the a has to be adapted slightly. How much follows from the tension, which is now (g - a')m3. Sort of, if I didn't miss something.

Funny they ask a first, then b...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 102 ·
4
Replies
102
Views
9K
  • · Replies 97 ·
4
Replies
97
Views
17K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K