Torque & Normals: Why Do We Ignore Normals?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Offlinedoctor
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Torques
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the confusion regarding the role of normal forces in torque calculations. It highlights that torque is defined in relation to forces acting perpendicular to the moment arm, meaning normal forces are inherently considered when they contribute to torque. The conversation points out that only the tangential component of a force is relevant for calculating torque unless friction at a hinge is involved. Additionally, the example of a hand pushing a bar illustrates that normal forces are often overlooked in basic torque problems. Ultimately, understanding the definition of torque clarifies why normal forces are not explicitly considered in many scenarios.
Offlinedoctor
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I'm struggling to understand why we never consider normals when doing torque questions?

One on the top of my head is a hand pushing a bar, 'x' metres away' from the pivot joint. From the worked examples, there is only one torque (the hand), but how come we never consider the normal forces involved? It gets more confusing when I think about applying torque to people on planks, how come when some people are standing we never take into account their normals when applying torque?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Offlinedoctor said:
Hi,

I'm struggling to understand why we never consider normals when doing torque questions?

Perhaps you should review the definition of torque:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torque

One on the top of my head is a hand pushing a bar, 'x' metres away' from the pivot joint. From the worked examples, there is only one torque (the hand), but how come we never consider the normal forces involved? It gets more confusing when I think about applying torque to people on planks, how come when some people are standing we never take into account their normals when applying torque?

Which 'normal forces' are you talking about? The definition of torque explicitly deals with normal forces acting perpendicular to a moment arm.
 
If you have a force acting with both horizontal and vertical components, then the tangent component will be used to calculate the torque. The "normal" component is only used if you have friction at the hinge.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top