Construction Worker Lifting Uniform Beam

AI Thread Summary
A construction worker is lifting a 2.26 m long beam weighing 397 N to a vertical position, holding it at a height of 1.21 m. The worker exerts a force of 168 N to maintain equilibrium, while the normal force from the floor is crucial for calculating the net force. The participant initially miscalculated the normal force, leading to confusion about the net force on the beam. After reevaluating the equilibrium conditions, the participant clarified that the net force requires both the normal force and the x-component of the applied force. The discussion highlights the importance of understanding equilibrium in solving physics problems related to forces.
Fetch
Messages
26
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A construction worker attempts to lift a uniform beam off the floor and raise it to a vertical position. The beam is 2.26 m long and weighs 397 N. At a certain instant the worker holds the beam momentarily at rest with one end a distance d = 1.21 m above the floor, as shown in the figure, by exerting a force on the beam.(a) What is the magnitude of ? (b) What is the magnitude of the (net) force of the floor on the beam? (c) What is the minimum value the coefficient of static friction between beam and floor can have in order for the beam not to slip at this instant?

Homework Equations


Just equilibrium conditions. Net force and net torque of the system are both zero.
Transtutors001_d6995745-e53b-4939-96ea-1b4f3886a4bd.PNG

The Attempt at a Solution



So I figured out a)168N and c)0.35 but can't find part b

I tried equilibrium conditions for the vertical forces.
W = 397N
F = 168N
N = normal force
theta = 32.37 degrees
W = Fcos(theta) + N
Solving for normal force I got
397N - 141N = 255N

This answer is wrong. What's confusing me is if I use this value for part C to find the coefficient of static friction it works just fine. The answer isn't zero, and even if it was, that would be wrong because the floor pushes back up on the beam due to molecular compression. I don't get why it isn't 255N? Did I miss something here?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Fetch said:
Solving for normal force I got
397N - 141N = 255N
That's all correct, but (b) does not ask for the normal force.
 
  • Like
Likes Fetch
Yeah I misconstrued the (net) force part. I figured it out now. I needed the normal force (N) and the x-component of the push (F) to find the net force on the beam. My mistake. Thank you.
 
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Correct statement about a reservoir with an outlet pipe'
The answer to this question is statements (ii) and (iv) are correct. (i) This is FALSE because the speed of water in the tap is greater than speed at the water surface (ii) I don't even understand this statement. What does the "seal" part have to do with water flowing out? Won't the water still flow out through the tap until the tank is empty whether the reservoir is sealed or not? (iii) In my opinion, this statement would be correct. Increasing the gravitational potential energy of the...
Back
Top