MHB Are These Equations for Particle and Wedge Dynamics Correct?

  • Thread starter Thread starter markosheehan
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Particles Wedge
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the correctness of equations related to particle and wedge dynamics, specifically addressing question 8. The user presents equations for both the wedge and the particle, involving forces such as R and S, and seeks clarification on their validity. Key equations derived include those for vertical and horizontal motion, leading to expressions for acceleration and forces acting on both the wedge and particle. Participants confirm that the user's approach to resolving motion is valid and suggest that alternative methods should yield consistent results. The conversation emphasizes the importance of correctly analyzing forces in both vertical and horizontal directions to solve the problem effectively.
markosheehan
Messages
133
Reaction score
0
View attachment 6272View attachment 6273

im stuck on question 8. the equation i got for the wedge is .6R -.5S=ma r stands for relative force of the particle s stands for relative force of the wedge . i got the equation 4mg-R=5m(.6a) for the particle where a stands for acceleration of the wedge. does anyone know where to go from here. are my equations wrong? i can post a picture of my diagram if anyone needs it
 

Attachments

  • WIN_20161207_14_10_56_Pro.jpg
    WIN_20161207_14_10_56_Pro.jpg
    77.4 KB · Views: 128
  • WIN_20161207_14_06_57_Pro (2).jpg
    WIN_20161207_14_06_57_Pro (2).jpg
    51.3 KB · Views: 122
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
View attachment 6287
The forces acting on the wedge are mg, friction, S the normal reaction between the wedge and the surface, and R the normal reaction between the wedge and the particle.
The forces actin on the particle are 5mg and R the normal reaction between the wedge and the particle
I have called α the angle with tan(α) = 3/4
If we call the acceleration of the wedge a then the equations of motion for the wedge are
1) vertically S = mg + R cos(α)
2) horizontally ma = R sin(α) - 0.5S

The equations of motion for the particle are
3) Horizontally 5m(bcos(α) - a) = Rsin(α) since bcos(α) - a is the total acceleration in this direction
4) Vertically 5mbsin(α) = 5mg - Rcos(α)

Eliminating S from 1) and 2) gives R = 5ma +2.5mg

Eliminating b from 3) and 4) gives 4mg - 3ma = R

Equating the two above expressions for R gives a = 3g/16

Substituting in 4 then gives b = 3g/4
 

Attachments

  • w3.jpg
    w3.jpg
    4.4 KB · Views: 128
can equation 3 also be 5m(b-.8a) = 3mg
and also i don't understand equation 4 5mbsin(α) = 5mg - Rcos(α) should it not be 4mg-R=5m(.6a) are you not supposed to look at the forces horizontal and vertical to the plane
 
markosheehan said:
can equation 3 also be 5m(b-.8a) = 3mg
and also i don't understand equation 4 5mbsin(α) = 5mg - Rcos(α) should it not be 4mg-R=5m(.6a) are you not supposed to look at the forces horizontal and vertical to the plane

To obtain my equations 3) and 4) I looked at the motion vertically and horizontally but you can certainly also look at motion along the plane and perpendicular to the plane. I believe your equations are correct for motion resolved the second way and these should also lead to the same solutions.
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
14
Views
10K
Back
Top