Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Hi TSR,



    I don’t understand for this question why we have to use moments to answer the question correctly. Surely, we can use equating forces(upward forces = downward forces) instead of using moments? Can someone please explain to me where the flaw in my logic is please.

    Btw I don’t need the answer I am just a bit stuck on my logic that’s all.

    Name:  213D935C-9ACF-4444-B024-B5C90ADF531D.jpg.jpeg
Views: 5
Size:  38.8 KB

    Thanks
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    I think you have to calculate the centre of gravity of the sign, and calculate the vertical component of the metal rod, and taking moments at the hinge.

    For a system to be in equilibrium, the net force = 0 and the moments = 0, so it is not accelerating or rotating.

    In theory, I believe you are equating forces, the weight is downwards and the tension is upwards.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Guarddyyy)
    I think you have to calculate the centre of gravity of the sign, and calculate the vertical component of the metal rod, and taking moments at the hinge.

    For a system to be in equilibrium, the net force = 0 and the moments = 0, so it is not accelerating or rotating.

    In theory, I believe you are equating forces, the weight is downwards and the tension is upwards.
    So how do I know when to equate forces and when to take moments?
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    What's the correct answer? I got 588.6N. If it's right I'll show you how I did it. My physics isn't the best tho lol so not sure if it is.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ahussainxo)
    What's the correct answer? I got 588.6N. If it's right I'll show you how I did it. My physics isn't the best tho lol so not sure if it is.
    The correct answer is 290N. You did it but equating forced directly. But in fact you have to take moments for some bizarre reason instead. Hence my question when do you take moments and when do you just equate forces?
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Yodalam)
    The correct answer is 290N. You did it but equating forced directly. But in fact you have to take moments for some bizarre reason instead. Hence my question when do you take moments and when do you just equate forces?
    Oh riiight. I've just calculated again and got 294N.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    I got the answer of 294.3N which is about 290N. Personally, I think that if you keep practising these questions you'd be able to spot when to use moments and when to equate forces. There is a pivot which I would assume hints at using moments since it can move at that point.

    All moments questions pretty much look the same anyway
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Is there a scientific explanation? Is it linked to equilibrium or something?
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    I would say it's linked to equilibrium. Since you have a pivot, there's moments involved, as well as the weight. Equilibrium with a pivot means moments = 0 and net force = 0, so nothing is moving.

    I hope that clears it up, otherwise, I'm out of explanations, unfortunately :C
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    wait are you sure the answer is 290N? because all you did was 30x9.81? wuuuuttt, what is the 80cm for?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ibyghee)
    wait are you sure the answer is 290N? because all you did was 30x9.81? wuuuuttt, what is the 80cm for?
    The answer is 294N rounded to (2sf)
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Yodalam)
    The answer is 294N rounded to (2sf)
    that 3sf?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ibyghee)
    wait are you sure the answer is 290N? because all you did was 30x9.81? wuuuuttt, what is the 80cm for?
    If you do the method of using moments and calculate the centre of gravity of the sign then calculate the clockwise and anticlockwise moments which equal 0.

    So you have 0.4 * 30 * 9.81 = T * sin30 * 0.8, which happens to be the same as 30 * 9.81, Unless I'm missing something
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ibyghee)
    that 3sf?
    Sorry my previous answer of 290N was 2sf. The non rounded answer is 294N. Sorry for the confusion
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Guarddyyy)
    If you do the method of using moments and calculate the centre of gravity of the sign then calculate the clockwise and anticlockwise moments which equal 0.

    So you have 0.4 * 30 * 9.81 = T * sin30 * 0.8, which happens to be the same as 30 * 9.81, Unless I'm missing something
    Ye hmmm weird, i think because 80 cm is so close to 1m it makes little difference.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    This is how I did it.
    Attached Images
     
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    I hope the theory behind it makes sense, if not I could try my best to make it clearer in any parts you don't understand. Then again, I'm just a year 13 student trying to get the A* in physics. The only thing dragging me down is stupid explanations.
    Online

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Yodalam)
    The correct answer is 290N. You did it but equating forced directly. But in fact you have to take moments for some bizarre reason instead. Hence my question when do you take moments and when do you just equate forces?
    You have to take moments in this example as the forces are all acting around a pivot so you can't just equate forces.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Yodalam)
    The correct answer is 290N. You did it but equating forced directly. But in fact you have to take moments for some bizarre reason instead. Hence my question when do you take moments and when do you just equate forces?
    You have to take moments about the hinge because that eliminates the forces acting there.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    Hey so to answer your question, you use moments here as it's not in equilibrium. You resolve forces when an object is in equilirbium. Here, the object moves as it's on a hinge, so it's not in equilibrium. Therefore in this instance you'd use moments. Sorry for the late response but I hope it helps.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
Updated: October 19, 2018

University open days

  • University of Bradford
    All faculties Undergraduate
    Wed, 21 Nov '18
  • Buckinghamshire New University
    All Faculties Postgraduate
    Wed, 21 Nov '18
  • Heriot-Watt University
    All Schools Postgraduate
    Wed, 21 Nov '18
Poll
Black Friday: Yay or Nay?

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.