## Simple Machines B/Compound Machines C

mjcox2000
Member
Posts: 120
Joined: May 9th, 2014, 3:34 am
State: VA

### Re: Simple Machines B/Compound Machines C

Unless I'm doing it wrong (and I don't think I am) no. I think you're messing up somewhere in the beginning.
Are the masses of the pulleys relevant?
`7.62 kg? I'm honestly thinking of just giving up and posting another question.`
`21*0.9^5=12.4 with sig figs`
MIT ‘23
TJHSST ‘19
Longfellow MS
```2019:
Circuit Lab: 1st
Thermodynamics: 2nd
Sounds of Music: 5th
Mission Possible: 6th

2018:
Code Busters (trial): 1st

2015:
Simple Machines: 2nd
SumoBots (trial): 2nd

2014:
WIDI: 2nd
Simple Machines: 3rd```

JonB
Coach
Posts: 290
Joined: March 11th, 2014, 12:00 pm
Division: C
State: FL

### Re: Simple Machines B/Compound Machines C

Ok then:

If M2 has a mass of 20.0 kg, and for all pulleys the mass is 1.00 kg and the efficiency is 90.0%, solve for the mass of M1 needed to balance the system (with proper significant figures) (assume all ropes are exactly vertical; I'm not sure how them being at angles would affect the system).
`29.9kg`

Unome
Moderator
Posts: 4133
Joined: January 26th, 2014, 12:48 pm
State: GA
Location: somewhere in the sciolyverse

### Re: Simple Machines B/Compound Machines C

Ok then:

If M2 has a mass of 20.0 kg, and for all pulleys the mass is 1.00 kg and the efficiency is 90.0%, solve for the mass of M1 needed to balance the system (with proper significant figures) (assume all ropes are exactly vertical; I'm not sure how them being at angles would affect the system).
`29.9kg`
Hmm... your answers are usually correct so I'm going to just post my work and ask about it; maybe I'm just doing the pulley efficiencies wrong (perhaps it doesn't matter, since everything is stable)
`[attachment=0]Untitled.png[/attachment]`
Attachments
Userpage
Chattahoochee High School Class of 2018
Georgia Tech Class of 2022

Opinions expressed on this site are not official; the only place for official rules changes and FAQs is soinc.org.

JonB
Coach
Posts: 290
Joined: March 11th, 2014, 12:00 pm
Division: C
State: FL

### Re: Simple Machines B/Compound Machines C

Ok then:

If M2 has a mass of 20.0 kg, and for all pulleys the mass is 1.00 kg and the efficiency is 90.0%, solve for the mass of M1 needed to balance the system (with proper significant figures) (assume all ropes are exactly vertical; I'm not sure how them being at angles would affect the system).
`29.9kg`
Hmm... your answers are usually correct so I'm going to just post my work and ask about it; maybe I'm just doing the pulley efficiencies wrong (perhaps it doesn't matter, since everything is stable)
`[attachment=0]Untitled.png[/attachment]`
Now that I have double-checked my work, I get a new
`of 18.1 kg.`
```Referring to the picture below, on the left side we see that T + .9T = 20 + 1, and T therefore = 11.053.
Then, on the right side where the two separate pulley trains connect, we see that .9^3 T + .9^4 T + 1 = .9 M1, and therefore solving for M1 we arrive at ~18.1kg.
Does this seem right? I do include inefficiency in the pulleys because if you imagine a very rusty inefficient pulley, you could probably hang unequal weights on both sides that differ by a small amount and still have the pulley hang stationary.
[attachment=0]Untitled.png[/attachment]```
Attachments

Unome
Moderator
Posts: 4133
Joined: January 26th, 2014, 12:48 pm
State: GA
Location: somewhere in the sciolyverse

### Re: Simple Machines B/Compound Machines C

`29.9kg`
Hmm... your answers are usually correct so I'm going to just post my work and ask about it; maybe I'm just doing the pulley efficiencies wrong (perhaps it doesn't matter, since everything is stable)
`[attachment=0]Untitled.png[/attachment]`
Now that I have double-checked my work, I get a new
`of 18.1 kg.`
```Referring to the picture below, on the left side we see that T + .9T = 20 + 1, and T therefore = 11.053.
Then, on the right side where the two separate pulley trains connect, we see that .9^3 T + .9^4 T + 1 = .9 M1, and therefore solving for M1 we arrive at ~18.1kg.
Does this seem right? I do include inefficiency in the pulleys because if you imagine a very rusty inefficient pulley, you could probably hang unequal weights on both sides that differ by a small amount and still have the pulley hang stationary.
[attachment=0]Untitled.png[/attachment]```
How does efficiency in pulleys work anyway? My logic (which may not make sense since the system is stable) was that as the rope is pulled through the pulley, it loses 10% of its tension, so the right side ropes need more tension than the left side.
Userpage
Chattahoochee High School Class of 2018
Georgia Tech Class of 2022

Opinions expressed on this site are not official; the only place for official rules changes and FAQs is soinc.org.

JonB
Coach
Posts: 290
Joined: March 11th, 2014, 12:00 pm
Division: C
State: FL

### Re: Simple Machines B/Compound Machines C

How does efficiency in pulleys work anyway? My logic (which may not make sense since the system is stable) was that as the rope is pulled through the pulley, it loses 10% of its tension, so the right side ropes need more tension than the left side.
I can best explain this with an example:

In the following image, the left pulley is assumed to be 100% efficient and the right pulley 1% efficient (some arbitrary number showing great inefficiency)
You can clearly see that the left pulley would only remain stationary if the two masses are equal; this isn't the case with the right pulley. For example, if the source of the right pulley's inefficiency was rust (illustrated rather horribly in Paint), then it is reasonable to assume that the right pulley could remain stable as shown, with unequal masses on either side.
That is the basis for my reasoning that pulley inefficiency does carry over into the stationary case.
paintshop.png (6.08 KiB) Viewed 2631 times

Unome
Moderator
Posts: 4133
Joined: January 26th, 2014, 12:48 pm
State: GA
Location: somewhere in the sciolyverse

### Re: Simple Machines B/Compound Machines C

How does efficiency in pulleys work anyway? My logic (which may not make sense since the system is stable) was that as the rope is pulled through the pulley, it loses 10% of its tension, so the right side ropes need more tension than the left side.
I can best explain this with an example:

In the following image, the left pulley is assumed to be 100% efficient and the right pulley 1% efficient (some arbitrary number showing great inefficiency)
You can clearly see that the left pulley would only remain stationary if the two masses are equal; this isn't the case with the right pulley. For example, if the source of the right pulley's inefficiency was rust (illustrated rather horribly in Paint), then it is reasonable to assume that the right pulley could remain stable as shown, with unequal masses on either side.
That is the basis for my reasoning that pulley inefficiency does carry over into the stationary case.
paintshop.png
Ok... I sort of get it. Anyway, the first person that gets here can ask a question.
Userpage
Chattahoochee High School Class of 2018
Georgia Tech Class of 2022

Opinions expressed on this site are not official; the only place for official rules changes and FAQs is soinc.org.

UTF-8 U+6211 U+662F
Exalted Member
Posts: 1518
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 7:42 am
Division: C
State: PA

### Re: Simple Machines B/Compound Machines C

How does efficiency in pulleys work anyway? My logic (which may not make sense since the system is stable) was that as the rope is pulled through the pulley, it loses 10% of its tension, so the right side ropes need more tension than the left side.
I can best explain this with an example:

In the following image, the left pulley is assumed to be 100% efficient and the right pulley 1% efficient (some arbitrary number showing great inefficiency)
You can clearly see that the left pulley would only remain stationary if the two masses are equal; this isn't the case with the right pulley. For example, if the source of the right pulley's inefficiency was rust (illustrated rather horribly in Paint), then it is reasonable to assume that the right pulley could remain stable as shown, with unequal masses on either side.
That is the basis for my reasoning that pulley inefficiency does carry over into the stationary case.
paintshop.png
Ok... I sort of get it. Anyway, the first person that gets here can ask a question.
Extremely simple question:
What is the "law of the lever?"

jkang
Member
Posts: 107
Joined: October 17th, 2014, 8:49 pm
State: TX

### Re: Simple Machines B/Compound Machines C

What is the "law of the lever?"
d1F1 = d2F2, where d = distance from the fulcrum and F = force applied
UT Austin '19
Liberal Arts and Science Academy '15

UTF-8 U+6211 U+662F
Exalted Member
Posts: 1518
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 7:42 am
Division: C
State: PA

### Re: Simple Machines B/Compound Machines C

What is the "law of the lever?"
d1F1 = d2F2, where d = distance from the fulcrum and F = force applied
`[math]d_1F_1 = d_2F_2[/math]`