
Welcome to the website of ME 274 for the Fall 2008 semester. On this site you can view blog posts, add your own blog posts and add comments to existing posts. In addition to the blog are links to course material: course information, information on solution videos, exams, quizzes, homeworks and other course-related material. Direct links to the homework solution videos are also available on the left side of this page.
The following is a reverse chronological order listing of the posts for the course blog. To add a post, click here (when adding posts, be sure to add a "label" in the box at the lower right side of the post window). To add a comment to an existing post, click on the "Comments" link below the post.
____________________________________________________
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I have been trying to describe this system for the last few hours as well. The simple setup which will allow me to solve is not yet apparent.
What I have done so far involves recognizing that the 50-kg block will experience a change in acceleration when the 15-kg collar is removed (two separate accelerations total). Therefore the distance "s" is composed of s1 and s2. I have written Newtonian (F=ma), Work-Energy (1 to 2, 2 to 3), and Kinematics (constant length cord) equations to relate the cylinder+collar and block. While I have solved for T (tension) at the first and second states (T1 and T2), the acceleration of the 50-kg block I get using T1 is negative (= down the incline) and using T2 the acceleration is positive.
It doesn't quite make physical sense for the block to move down the incline, and then, with even less mass producing smaller Tension, go back up the slope. Here are the details:
T1 = 109.32 N
a_x' = -3.084 [m/s^2]
T2 = 382.35 N
a_x'' = +7.84 [m/s^2]
By writing two Work-Energy equations for the 50-kg block, and trudging through some ridiculous looking algebra, I was able to obtain the following values:
s1 = -1.768 [m]
s2 = -1.857 [m]
s = s1 + s2
s = -3.62 [m]
Although I am worried about being in the dark as to the simple solution, I have a answer that doesn't look too ridiculous.
Good luck.
So in other words its so ridiculous that we shouldn't worry about it?
Post a Comment