Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:


    A light rod in equilibrium has two forces acting on it.

    If I use the horizontal component of F2 and resolve horizontally:

    F2 sin a = F1

    If I use the component of F1 perpendicular to the rod and resolve perpendicular to the rod:

    F1 sin a = F2

    Have I made a mistake? Why are these equations different?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Looks fine.

    What do you mean 'different'?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WhisperingTide)
    Looks fine.

    What do you mean 'different'?
    F1 = F2 sin a (1)
    F1 sin a = F2 (2)

    Plug (1) into (2):

    F2 sin^2 a = F2

    sin^2 a = 1

    But 'a' could be any acute angle?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 0-))
    F1 = F2 sin a (1)
    F1 sin a = F2 (2)

    Plug (1) into (2):

    F2 sin^2 a = F2

    sin^2 a = 1

    But 'a' could be any acute angle?
    Yeah, I came to the same conclusion.
    I don't see how what you've done could be wrong, though, unless I'm having a brain fart.

    I rationalised it by basically saying that if that rod is supposed to be in equilibrium, you'll have moments and therefor distances to be concerned with. (As it is that thing is going to spin counter-clockwise)
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WhisperingTide)
    Yeah, I came to the same conclusion.
    I don't see how what you've done could be wrong, though, unless I'm having a brain fart.

    I rationalised it by basically saying that if that rod is supposed to be in equilibrium, you'll have moments and therefor distances to be concerned with. (As it is that thing is going to spin counter-clockwise)
    Maybe it's impossible for this rod to be in equilibrium for an acute angle 'a'?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 0-))
    Maybe it's impossible for this rod to be in equilibrium for an acute angle 'a'?
    If it's not fixed at a point then it will be, yeah.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WhisperingTide)
    If it's not fixed at a point then it will be, yeah.
    Also in reality the rod would have weight so that would be included when resolving and it would make the equations work.

    Thanks for helping.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

Make your revision easier

Maths

Maths Forum posting guidelines

Not sure where to post? Read the updated guidelines here

Equations

How to use LaTex

Writing equations the easy way

Student revising

Study habits of A* students

Top tips from students who have already aced their exams

Study Planner

Create your own Study Planner

Never miss a deadline again

Polling station sign

Thinking about a maths degree?

Chat with other maths applicants

Can you help? Study help unanswered threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.