B How Does Inclined Load Affect Weight Distribution When Moving a Cabinet?

AI Thread Summary
Inclined load significantly affects weight distribution when moving a cabinet, particularly regarding torque and force balance. When lifting one side of the cabinet, the weight on the opposite side decreases, and the distribution depends on the cabinet's center of mass and the angle of inclination. For a cabinet with a total weight of 42 kg at a 27° slope, the forces acting on the movers can be calculated using torque equations to ensure equilibrium. The lower mover on stairs will bear more weight due to the incline, while the top end appears lighter. Understanding these principles is crucial for safely and effectively moving heavy objects.
tomlib
Messages
13
Reaction score
2
TL;DR Summary
How the weight changes on the sides of the body/cabinet if it is tilted
Hello. I want to ask for advice. I know I probably won't understand it anyway, but maybe some information will help me. I did not find a solution to this problem on the Internet, which in itself I do not understand. We moved the cabinet and I can't calculate how much the weight on the opposite side will change if the cabinet is lifted on one side.
Likewise if it is held on the bottom or top edge. Is it necessary to take into account that the cabinet has mass in the sides and not in the center of the body? I was able to determine that if the cabinet was hung at one end only, the suspension point would bear the full weight, if it were raised at the other end, this weight would gradually decrease, but how and by how much? Perhaps the crank relation of cosine on a circle applies. Similarly, I would be interested, if two movers carry a cabinet down the stairs, how much weight will the lower mover carry. The inclined plane is applied here, but also the force that must lift the cabinet upwards. Again, there is probably a paradox in view of the above, that it seems that the top end at the top of the stairs will be lighter. Can someone give me some information? I would also welcome a logical reasoning.
So I'm actually interested in cases where the cabinet is attached at points A and B and then also at points C and B. The slope is 27°, the total weight of the cabinet can be 42 kg.

(I used Google Translator)

tomlib
 

Attachments

  • úloha na nakloněné břemeno.png
    úloha na nakloněné břemeno.png
    15.7 KB · Views: 70
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi,

Key concept here is torque : the case is not moving and not rotating.
If the mass of the case is not distributed asymmetrically, the center of mass is in the middle as drawn here:

1712856040348.png


and equilibrium means two requirements are satisfied:

1. Force balance : ##F_a + F_b + mg = 0##. Since ##mg = -420 ## N you get ##F_a + F_b = 420## N

2. Torque balance: take the center of mass as axis of rotation, then no rotation takes place if
##x_a\times F_a - x_b\times F_b = 0##

With ##AC = p## and ##AB=q## you have ##AD = \sqrt{p^2+q^2}## and with an angle of ##\theta = 27^\circ## you have ##x_a+x_b=p\cos\theta## and ##x_a = {1\over 2} (p\cos\theta - q \sin\theta)## and of course ##x_b = {1\over 2} (p\cos\theta + q \sin\theta)##

##\ ##
 
Last edited:
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...
This has been discussed many times on PF, and will likely come up again, so the video might come handy. Previous threads: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-a-treadmill-incline-just-a-marketing-gimmick.937725/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/work-done-running-on-an-inclined-treadmill.927825/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-we-calculate-the-energy-we-used-to-do-something.1052162/
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top