Can't get this tension derivation........

  • Thread starter Thread starter singh_abhi
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Derivation Tension
AI Thread Summary
Tension in a rope does not always equal the weight of the suspended mass, especially in systems like an Atwood machine with unequal masses. When the system accelerates, the tension varies depending on the direction of acceleration and the weights involved. For the heavier mass, tension is less than its weight due to downward acceleration, while for the lighter mass, tension exceeds its weight because it accelerates upward. Understanding free body diagrams is crucial, as they illustrate the forces acting on each mass and help clarify the relationship between tension and weight. The derived equations show that acceleration is influenced by the difference in weights, confirming that tension is a dynamic force rather than a static one.
singh_abhi
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Ok guys, i just don't seem to know anything about tension, i thought that it would always equal the weight that is suspended from the rope...But that does not seem to be the case...and also i don't get the issue of its direction.
Anyways, suppose we have an atwood machine and two unequal masses attached to a rope...then the system accelerates...What I don't get is the fact that here Tension is not equal to any of the weight, why is it not so...When we suspend a single weight from a ceiling, then it is...i think the reason i am confused is that i have no understanding of the fundamentals of tension...Any help will be appreciated. Thanks...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
singh_abhi said:
Ok guys, i just don't seem to know anything about tension, i thought that it would always equal the weight that is suspended from the rope...But that does not seem to be the case...and also i don't get the issue of its direction.
Anyways, suppose we have an atwood machine and two unequal masses attached to a rope...then the system accelerates...What I don't get is the fact that here Tension is not equal to any of the weight, why is it not so...When we suspend a single weight from a ceiling, then it is...i think the reason i am confused is that i have no understanding of the fundamentals of tension...Any help will be appreciated. Thanks...
Are you familiar with drawing free body diagrams (FBDs)? They will show all of the forces on an object. If the rope is not just supporting the weight but is also providing acceleration upward, the tension force will be greater than the weight being accelerated...
 
berkeman said:
Are you familiar with drawing free body diagrams (FBDs)? They will show all of the forces on an object. If the rope is not just supporting the weight but is also providing acceleration upward, the tension force will be greater than the weight being
accelerated...
I understand it, but only from a mathematical point of view, since there is an upward acceleration on the smaller block, and since weight acts downwards ,then the upward acceleration must be due to tension. I also know that the net force acting on the system would be m2g-m1g...and that this would equal (m2+m1)a...
I get why this happens conceptually...I just can't get why tension is less than the heavier weight and greater than the smaller weight.
 
singh_abhi said:
I just can't get why tension is less than the heavier weight and greater than the smaller weight.

Look at the forces on each mass on it's own...

The heavier weight M1 is accelerating downwards suggesting that the tension in the rope isn't sufficient to support it's weight... T1 = M1(g-a)

The lighter weight M2 is accelerating upwards so the tension must provide an upward force greater than it's weight... T2 = M2(g+a)

If the same rope supports both masses (and any pulley is frictionless with negligible inertia) then the tension is the same in all parts of the rope so equate..

T1=T2
and
M1(g-a) = M2(g+a)
expand
M1g-M1a = M2g+M2a
rearrange
M1g-M2g = M1a+M2a
or ...
a = (M1-M2)g/(M1+M2)

Note that a is less than g which is what you would expect. The small mass stops the larger one falling at g.
 
Thread 'Is 'Velocity of Transport' a Recognized Term in English Mechanics Literature?'

Thread 'Is 'Velocity of Transport' a Recognized Term in English Mechanics Literature?'

Here are two fragments from Banach's monograph in Mechanics I have never seen the term <<velocity of transport>> in English texts. Actually I have never seen this term being named somehow in English. This term has a name in Russian books. I looked through the original Banach's text in Polish and there is a Polish name for this term. It is a little bit surprising that the Polish name differs from the Russian one and also differs from this English translation. My question is: Is there...
View full post »

Thread 'Is calling fictitious forces "not real" just about terminology?'

Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
View full post »

Similar threads

Calculating Tension in a Suspended Rope with a 50kg Weight
Replies
2
Views
2K
B What is tension and how does it affect a rope?
Replies
2
Views
2K
Correct understanding of the tension force
Replies
5
Views
2K
What causes tension in a rope moving in a vertical circle?
Replies
40
Views
4K
I Question about an example in Newton's Principia
Replies
1
Views
1K
Tension force in Atwood machine
Replies
7
Views
5K
How will the pitch of a string change when I stretch it? (sound)
2
Replies
64
Views
6K
Tension is causing me to be tensed
Replies
37
Views
4K
Is tension really just a matter of perspective?
Replies
4
Views
4K
I Questions about a spring and its principle
Replies
9
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top