I When can I treat a joint as a fixed conection?

  • Thread starter Thread starter John Mcrain
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Joint
Click For Summary
A joint can be treated as a fixed connection under certain conditions, even if it cannot transfer moments, as long as external forces are applied correctly. The discussion highlights that using internal forces within the joint can yield accurate results while maintaining the same pivot point. The pivot point is defined as the location below the 10kg beam where it balances and remains horizontal. The scenario assumes that the system is not floating in space, and the 100kg box can separate from the 10kg box. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for accurate mechanical analysis.
John Mcrain
Messages
435
Reaction score
28
jiojo.jpg

Question is : is pivot point is both case at same position...

Useing only external forces (100kg,10kg and 30kg) I can treat joint as fixed conection and still get correct results,in both case pivot point is at same positon,even right case has joint at right side of beam..
How is possible that I treat joint as fixed conection and still get correct result,isnt this confusing becasue joint can't trasnfer moment ,only forces?When I can't treat joint as fixed conection?
Because joint can't trasfer moment only forces,so I can use internal forces inside joint and still get same results,pivot point is at same position in both case..
 
Physics news on Phys.org
John Mcrain said:
Question is : is pivot point is both case at same position...
View attachment 278592
Define "pivot point " mathematically.
Is the whole thing floating in space?
Is the 100kg box free to separate from the 10kg box?
 
A.T. said:
Define "pivot point " mathematically.
Is the whole thing floating in space?
Is the 100kg box free to separate from the 10kg box?

no in space,yes it can separate..
Pivot point is point below 10kg beam so beam is balance,stay horizontal..

jiojo.jpg
 
Thread 'The rocket equation, one more time'
I already posted a similar thread a while ago, but this time I want to focus exclusively on one single point that is still not clear to me. I just came across this problem again in Modern Classical Mechanics by Helliwell and Sahakian. Their setup is exactly identical to the one that Taylor uses in Classical Mechanics: a rocket has mass m and velocity v at time t. At time ##t+\Delta t## it has (according to the textbooks) velocity ##v + \Delta v## and mass ##m+\Delta m##. Why not ##m -...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
5K
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
42
Views
6K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K