Trying to solve 3x3 determinant with two zeros

  • Thread starter Thread starter togo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    3x3 Determinant
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a physics problem involving the equilibrium of a flowerpot suspended by three wires with unknown tensions. The participants are analyzing the system of equations derived from the forces acting on the flowerpot, specifically focusing on the tensions Tab, Tbc, and Tbd.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the use of Cramer's rule to solve for the tension in the wires, questioning the correctness of the coefficients used in the equations. There is also discussion about potential arithmetic errors and the implications of the results obtained.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with participants verifying calculations and questioning the setup of the equations. Some guidance has been offered regarding the potential errors in the equations, but no consensus has been reached on the correct approach or solution.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of a discrepancy in the coefficients of Tab, which may affect the calculations. Additionally, the participants are working within the constraints of homework rules that may limit the information they can share or verify.

togo
Messages
106
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


3 wires and unknown tensions: Tab, Tbc, Tbd
Flowerpot being suspended in equilibrium

Code:
Fx =  .05Tab - 0.728Tbc - 0.728Tbd = 0 lbs
Fy = -.05Tab + 0.485Tbc + 0.485Tbd = 20 lbs (weight of flower pot)
Fz =    0Tab + 0.485Tbc - 0.485Tbd = 0 lbs


Homework Equations



Is it possible to find tension in one of these wires?

The Attempt at a Solution



Using Cramers rule, came up with

Code:
-14.1232/0.117855

which was incorrect.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You seem to have made an arithmetic error somewhere. Your answer for Tab is off by a factor of 10.
 
I went over it again today and got the same answer :(
back of the book lists 17 lbs for Tab. Here is the determinant I used,

2n0q0i9.png


resulting in

[tex]\frac{-7.0616-7.0616}{(-0.1176125)+(0.17654)-(-0.017654)-(0.1176125)}[/tex]

= 119.83 lbs, Tab
 
Are the coefficients of Tab equal to 0.5 (third post) or 0.05 (original post)? That's the factor of 10 difference between our answers. So the good news is you're basically calculating Tab correctly using Cramer's rule. The bad news is, if Tab is supposed to be 17 lb, your equations are wrong.
 
0.5, sorry. Not sure where the equations may have gone wrong.
 
Just a guess, but I'd expect the coefficients of Tab should be either [itex]\pm 1/\sqrt{2}[/itex] or one of them should be [itex]\pm \sqrt{3}/{2}[/itex].

More generally, if you form a vector from the coefficients of Tab, the norm of the vector should be 1.
 
Last edited:
I went over the numbers with someone else in my class who also verifies that the coordinates used are correct. It sounds like this problem can be solved using a graphing calculator, but its strange that I was unable to solve it using cramers rule.
 
It's not strange that Cramer's rule doesn't work. What's strange is you concluding Cramer's rule only works some of the time rather than concluding your equations are wrong or that you are making some other mistake. If a proved result, like Cramer's rule, doesn't seem to be working, that's an indication that there's something else is wrong.

I can tell you that if you and your classmate got exactly the same equations, you and your classmate are wrong. If your classmate claims to have gotten the right answer from those equations, he or she is making yet another mistake.

I can read off the components of Tab from your equations. According to them, the force Tab is equal to[tex]\vec{T}_{ab} = \frac{T_{ab}}{2} \mathbf{\hat{i}} + \frac{T_{ab}}{2} \mathbf{\hat{j}}[/tex]where Tab=|Tab|. But this implies that[tex] \lvert \vec{T}_{ab} \rvert = T_{ab} \sqrt{\left(\frac{1}{2}\right)^2+\left(\frac{1}{2}\right)^2} = T_{ab}\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2} \ne T_{ab}[/tex]which is a contradiction, which in turn indicates your equations are wrong.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
7K