Pulley Question: Accelerating Faster Than G

Thread starter cragar
Start date Jun 2, 2010
Tags

Pulley

AI Thread Summary

Certain pulley systems can achieve accelerations greater than gravitational acceleration (g) by utilizing specific configurations of ropes and weights. While these setups can increase acceleration, they also result in a reduction of the force applied. The mechanics of these systems rely on the principles of tension and force distribution. Understanding the balance between acceleration and force is crucial in designing effective pulley arrangements. Overall, while higher accelerations are possible, they come with trade-offs in force output.

Jun 2, 2010

cragar

I remember my physics teacher saying that there is a setup with ropes and pulley’s and weights which can get you accelerations larger than g does anyone know what this configuration looks like .

Physics news on Phys.org

Jun 2, 2010

pallidin

Acceleration is certainly available in pulley arrangements.
However, and most important, the force will be reduced.

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 'Newton's first law?'

Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?

View full post »