What is the significance of F being a roller joint in this system?

AI Thread Summary
The significance of F being a roller joint in the system is that it allows for movement in the x-direction without imposing any resistance, preventing over-constraining the system. If F were not a roller joint, it would create additional constraints, leading to a statically indeterminate situation that complicates analysis. The absence of force in the x-direction at F is crucial, as any force would result in movement, indicating that the joint is functioning correctly. Understanding this concept is essential for solving problems related to statics and dynamics in engineering contexts. Overall, recognizing the role of roller joints is vital for accurate system modeling and analysis.
theBEAST
Messages
361
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


tUv0v.png

Assume the system is massless.

The Attempt at a Solution


Here is my quick attempt at drawing a free body diagram for this system:
LSe0p.jpg


What I am not sure about is the direction of the force at F. Should the force be A or B?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Can't you just assume a direction, and if the force comes out negative, it's in the opposite direction from what you assumed?
 
cepheid said:
Can't you just assume a direction, and if the force comes out negative, it's in the opposite direction from what you assumed?

The prof posted answers online and it says that F is a roller joint and there is no force in the x direction. The reason why it is a roller joint is because if it wasn't it would be over constrained. Does anyone understand what is meant by this?
 
theBEAST said:
The prof posted answers online and it says that F is a roller joint and there is no force in the x direction. The reason why it is a roller joint is because if it wasn't it would be over constrained. Does anyone understand what is meant by this?

Hmm...try looking at this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overdetermined_system
 
You didn't actually write down a well-defined problem statement. What exactly is it that you're being asked to solve for?
 
theBEAST said:
The prof posted answers online and it says that F is a roller joint and there is no force in the x direction. The reason why it is a roller joint is because if it wasn't it would be over constrained. Does anyone understand what is meant by this?

The reason there is no force in the x-direction at F is because the joint is a roller, it resists no forces in the x-direction. A force in the x-direction on a roller would cause it to move.

The idea your professor is mentioning is that if the joint at F was not a roller and rather a pin or some other type of constraint which imposed more than one resistance on the system, the system would be over constrained or statically indeterminate. These types of problems are solvable only through some sort of continuity condition such as material property relations that go beyond just performing force analysis.
 
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Back
Top