Where did I go wrong (torque/moment problem)

  • Thread starter Thread starter FaroukYasser
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on calculating the torque produced by the weight of a pendulum bob, specifically with a mass of 0.50 kg and a vertical distance of 40 cm from the suspension point. The user calculated the torque using the formula Torque = force x perpendicular distance, arriving at a value of 1.15 N.m. However, the textbook states the answer is 2 N.m, leading to a debate about potential errors in the textbook's angle or trigonometric function used in the calculations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of torque calculations in physics
  • Knowledge of trigonometric functions and their applications
  • Familiarity with pendulum mechanics
  • Basic principles of force and weight
NEXT STEPS
  • Review the derivation of torque in rotational dynamics
  • Study the application of trigonometric functions in physics problems
  • Examine common errors in textbook solutions for physics problems
  • Learn about the implications of angle selection in torque calculations
USEFUL FOR

Students studying physics, educators teaching mechanics, and anyone interested in understanding torque and pendulum dynamics.

FaroukYasser
Messages
62
Reaction score
3

Homework Statement


24vsbgg.gif

In the figure above, what is the torque about the pendulum’s suspension point produced
by the weight of the bob, given that the mass is 40 cm below the suspension point,
measured vertically, and m = 0.50 kg ? (let g = 10 ms^-2 for easier calculations)

Homework Equations


Torque = force x perpendicular distance to the pivot

The Attempt at a Solution


I first got the components of the Weight force:
hu4qzc.gif

And I got L using trigonometry:
sin60 = 0.4/L
L = 0.4/sin60
L = (4root3)/15 which is about 0.463

Now torque = F x Perpendicular distance =
5cos60 x L = 5cos60 x 0.463 = 1.15 N.m

But the answer is 2 N.m in the textbook! where have I gone wrong?
[/B]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't think you've gone wrong, I think the textbook has. It looks like they used the wrong angle or the wrong trig function for the calculation of the force component perpendicular to L. Your result looks okay to me.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
9K