ion of Equilibrium

Analysis

The experiment prior to this one has given us a narrow

understanding of how torque works on a rigid body and by understanding

the relationship of the moment of inertia and the acceleration of the rigid

body. Furthermore, it has also given us a glimpse of its concept and

application of Newton’s Second Law onto rotating rigid bodies.

However, in this experiment, we will discuss about torque and its

applications on the second condition of equilibrium. We will also be

discussing which aspects of a force determines how effective it is in causing

or changing rotational motion. The magnitude and direction of the force

are important, but so if the point on the body where the force is applied. In

Figure 1, a wrench is being used to loosen a tight bolt. The force Fb applied

near the end of the handle, is more effective than an equal force Fa applied

near the bolt. Force Fc doesn’t help at all even though it has the same

applied force as Fb and at the same point, but its direction is directed along

the length of the handle. The quantitative measure of the tendency of a

force to cause or change a body’s rotational motion is called torque.

 Figure 1. An Example of a Force

Analysis for Torque

If we are going to look at Figure 2, it shows that three examples of

how to calculate torque. The body in the figure can rotate about an axis that

is perpendicular to the plan of the figure and passes through point O.

Three forces, F1, F2, and F3, act on the body in the plane of the figure. The

tendency of the first of these forces, F1, to cause a rotation about O depends

on its magnitude F1. It also depends on the perpendicular distance l1

between point O and the line of action of the force. The distance l1 is called

the lever arm (or moment arm) of force F1 about O. The twisting effort is

directly proportional to both F1 and l1. So, torque of the force F1 with

respect to O can be defined as the product of F1l1. In general, the formula

for torque is given by the equation in Equation (1); wherein, F is the force

applied on a specific point and l is the distance of that force applied from

the center of mass of the object.

Figure 2. The Torque of a Force

about a Point is the Product of the Force Magnitude and the lever arm of

the Force.
 Figure 3. Three Ways to Calculate Torque

The term “torque” is often usually used by physicist, while engineers

usually use terms like “moment”. However, both groups use the term

“lever arm” or “moment arm” for the distance l. In Figure 2, the lever arm

of F1 is the perpendicular distance l1, and the lever arm of F2 is the

perpendicular distance l2. The line of action of F3 passes through point O,

so the lever arm of F3 is zero and its torque with respect to O is zero. A

word of reminder that torque is always measured about a point. It is

always defined with reference to a specific point, such that, if we shift the

position of this point, the torque of each force may also change. In addition,

it is important to remember that a counterclockwise rotation has a positive

torque and a clockwise rotation has a negative torque. The SI unit of torque

is newton-meters, but, since torque is not a work or an energy, it cannot be

expressed in joules. In general, torque can be computed in three ways, as

shown in Figure 3. In Equation (2), torque is equated into the three

equations that can be used in finding the value of the torque. Since torques

is a vector, it can be expressed into a product of two vectors, as shown in

Equation (3). It is a dot product if the vector points out of the page, and it is

a cross product if it points into the page. Going back to our discussion in

the previous experiment, torque can be expressed in terms of angular

acceleration through the use of the angular acceleration of a rigid body and

its moment of inertia. From the previous experiment, we were able to get

the formula of torque in terms of the product of the moment of inertia of a

rigid body and its angular acceleration, as shown in Equation (4).

 The torque on each particle is due to the net force on that particle,

which is the vector sum of external and internal forces. According to

Newton’s third law, the internal forces that any pair of particles in the rigid

body exert on each other are equal and opposite, as shown in Figure 4. If

these forces act along the line joining the two particles, their lever arms

with respect to any axis are also equal. So, the torques for each such pair

are equal and opposite and add to zero. Hence all the internal torques add

to zero, so the sum Στz includes only the torques of the external forces.

Figure 4. Two Particles in a

Rigid Body Exert Equal and Opposite Forces on Each Other.

 Often, an important external force acting on a body is its weight. This

force is not concentrated at a single point; it acts on every particle in the

entire body. Nevertheless, it turns out that if g has the same value at all

points, it will always result to the correct torque about any specified axis, if

we assume that all the weight is concentrated at the center of mass of the

body. In relation, by tackling the idea of rigid-body rotation about a

moving axis, we can extend our analysis of the dynamics of rotational

motion to some cases in which the axis of rotation moves. When that

happens, the motion of the body is combined translation and rotation. The

key to understanding such situation is this idea of every possible motion of

a rigid body can be represented as a combination of translational motion of

the center of mass and rotation about an axis through the center of mass.

This is true even when the center of mass accelerates, so that it is not at rest

in any inertial frame.

The more

in-depth proving of the idea that the motion of a rigid body can always be
divided into translation of the center of mass and rotation about the center

of mass will be discussed in engineering mechanics. For now, it is

important to learn the equivalence of kinetic energy of a rigid body that has

both translational and rotational motions, as shown in Equation (5).

Figure 5. The Motion of a Rolling Wheel

An important case of combined translation and rotation is rolling

without slipping, such as the motion of the wheel shown in Figure 5. The

wheel is symmetrical, so its center of mass is at its geometric center. The

wheel is symmetrical, so its center of mass is at its geometric center. We

view the motion in an inertial frame of reference in which the surface on

which the wheel rolls are at rest. In this frame, the point on the wheel that

contacts the surface must be instantaneously at rest so that it does not slip.

Hence, the

velocity v1 of the point of contact relative to the center of mass must have

the same magnitude but opposite direction as the center-of-mass velocity

vcm. If the radius of the wheel is R and its angular speed about the center

of mass is ω, then the magnitude v1 is Rω; thus, we will have an equation

shown in Equation (6), which is also the condition for rolling without

slipping.

Figure 6. Diagram for Computing the Angular Momentum

Aside from the concept of torque, the idea of momentum is also

important in this experiment. The analog of momentum of a particle is

angular momentum, which is a vector quantity denoted as L. It has the

same relationship to linear momentum, in which it is given by the Equation

(7). Based on Figure 6, the formula for angular momentum can be given by

the equation in Equation (8); where l is the perpendicular distance form the

line of v to O. This distance plays the role of “lever arm” for the
momentum vector. From the definition of angular momentum, another

definition of torque may arise. As shown in Equation (9), the rate of change

of angular moment of a particle equals the torque of the net force acting on

it. Lastly, in Equation (10), the angular momentum is equated with moment

of inertia in order to find the angular momentum of a rigid body.

To begin, our experiment has two main objectives to comply, first is

to apply the 2nd Condition of Equilibrium in analyzing systems that are in

rotational equilibrium, and the other objective is to determine the weight of

a rigid body using the 2nd Condition of Equilibrium. The second condition

of equilibrium simply states that the sum of all torque on the body or
system must be equal to zero because to achieve equilibrium involves

avoiding accelerated rotation (maintaining a constant angular velocity). A

rotating body or system can be in equilibrium if its rate of rotation is

constant and remains unchanged by the forces acting on it.

Figure 7. Materials for the Experiment

The materials needed for accomplishing the experiment are one set

model balance, one set weights, one-piece meterstick, one-piece protractor,

two
pieces weight pans, and one-piece spring balance. Now, the procedure for

the experiment is divided into two parts, part A, which determine the

weight of the pans, and part B, which determine the weight of the beam.

Refer to figure 7 for the material needed for the experiment.

Figure 8. Part A of the experiment

For the first part of the experiment Part A, our group started to

placed 10-g on the first pan and 5-g on the second pan. Then, the pans were

placed on the model balance placing and arranging them carefully so that

the model balance will not move and stay at stationary position. After

successfully setting the balance at an equilibrium state, the group

measured the distance between two pans from the axis of rotation. These

steps were repeated for the second trial with varying weights. The weights

placed on the second trial were 15-g on the first pan and 25-g on the second

pan. After completing all of the procedures, our group then came up to a

formula which computes for the computed weights of the pan and used

substitution method from systems of linear equation in order to achieve

our results for Table 1. Refer to equation (11) for the formula used to

compute for the computed weight of the pans. Refer to figure 8 for part A
 Figure 9. Part B of the Experiment

For the second part of the experiment, the same material were used

as well but instead the axis of rotation is placed on the second hole of the

beam so that the center of gravity of the beam does not pass through the

new axis of rotation. This is so that we can determine weight of the beam.

After setting up the new axis of rotation, we placed 50g of weiht on P 1 and

adjusts its location so that the system will be in equilibrium. We then

measured the distance of P1 and WB from the axis of rotation and marked L1
and L2 respectively. Next is to compute for the weight of the beam. We

repeated the steps earlier for two trials; however, we are going to use

different values. Lastly, to solve for the computed value of the weight of

the beam, we used substitution method from systems of linear equation in

order to achieve our results for Table 2. Refer to equation (11) as well for

the formula used to compute for the computed weight of the beam, Refer

to figure 9 for Part B.

- P 1 L 1 + P 2 L 2 = W1 L 1
- P1 L 3+ P2 L4 = - W2 L4 (11)

TABLE 1. DETERMINING THE WEIGHT OF PAN

Actual Value of P1 = 24.8 grams
Actual Value of P2 = 24.8 grams
Trial L1 L2 L3 L4 P1 P2
1 W1 = 10g 14.4 20.0 15.1 12.5 25.0 24.72
W2 = 5g cm cm cm cm g g
2 W1 = 15g 12.52 19.9 20.15 10.0 24.83 25.04
W2 = 25g cm cm cm cm g g
Average weight of P1 24.9 grams
Average weight of P2 24.9 grams
 % Difference for P1 0.08 %
% Difference for P2 1.29 %

These are the equations we used in order to compute the data needed

for the Part A of this experiment:

2nd Condition of Equilibrium

−P 1 L 1+ P2 L 2=W 1 L 1−P 1 L 3+ P 2 L 4=W 2 L 4

Percent Differece

Average weight of

the Pans

From the data that we have gathered for the first part of the

experiment which is to determine the weight of the pan, the first distance

measured with the weights of 10g was 14.4cm for P1 and 20.0cm for P2.
Next is the measurement for the second distance while using the weights of

5g was 15.1cm for P1 and 12.5cm for P2. We wrote an equation using the

2nd Condition of Equilibrium and used it and came up with P1

(computed0 which resulted to 25.0g and P2 (computed) which resulted

24.72. For the 2nd trial, the first distance measured with the weights of 15g

was 12.52cm for P1 and 19.9cm for P2. Next is the measurement for the

second distance while using the weights of 25g was 20.15cm for P1 and

10.0cm for P2. We used the equation we came up with again and used it

and came up with P1 (computed0 which resulted to 24.83g and P2

(computed) which resulted 25.04. The average of both pans were computed

to be 24.9g. The percent difference for P1 is 0.08% and the computed

percent difference for P2 is 1.29%.

TABLE 2. DETERMINING THE WEIGHT OF THE BEAM

Trial L1 L2 W1 + P1 WB WB
(Computed) (Measured)
1 14.0 cm 7.5 cm 74.8 g 139.6 g 132.2 g

2 12.3 cm 7.5 cm 84.8 g 139.07 g

 3 11.0 cm 7.5 cm 94.8 g 139.04 g

Average weight of Beam, WB 139.23 grams

Percent Difference 5.32 %

These are the equations we used in order to compute the data needed

for the Part B of this experiment:

2nd Condition of Equilibrium

−P 1 L 1+ P2 L 2=W 1 L 1−P 1 L 3+ P 2 L 4=W 2 L 4

Percent Difference

Average weight of

the Pans

From the data that we have gathered for the second part of the

experiment, which is to determine the weight of the beam, the distance

from the axis of rotation to the center of the beam L 2 remained constant for

every trial and the measured distance is 7.5cm. With the other distance

present, we were able to measure the distance required to achieve

equilibrium for L1 easily. For the first trial, the distance required to achieve

equilibrium is 14.0cm. For the second trial, the distance required to achieve

equilibrium is 12.3.0cm. For the third trial, the distance required to achieve

equilibrium is 11.0cm. Note that each trial has different set of weights

added to pan which resulted to different values for each trial. For the

computed Weight of the beam, resulted to the first trial having 139.6g, the

second trial having 139.07g, and the third trial having 139.04g.

Furthermore, the measured weight of the beam is 132.2g. Overall, the

average weight of the beam was 139.23g. The computed percent difference

is 5.32%.

Conclusion

Based on the experiment’s data and results that we have gathered, a

general idea could be brought up in which, the heavier the object, the closer

it must be to the axis of rotation and the lighter the object, the farther it
must be in order to have a static equilibrium. The experiment conducted

was able to determine the factors affecting the torque applied to a body

such as the displacement of the object from the pivot point and the

magnitude of force that affects it. Additionally, if a system is in

equilibrium, then it is not in any rotational force. The results showed that if

the pan are in equilibrium, then the sum of all torque must be zero.

In conclusion, as much as torque is directly proportional with the

force applied on a particle, it is also dependent on the perpendicular

distance of the applied force to the axis of rotation. Therefore, two unequal

weights can be balanced in the model, given that the center of gravity is

adjusted in order to achieve equilibrium. The different weights should be

placed at positions wherein the torque would still be equal on both ends of

the model balance. In order for the torque to be equal, the distance must be

adjusted to the point where the overall torque of the system is zero.