Various scales for measuring the mass of objects are used in daily life. This question is about the physical principles related to the beam balance, the Roberval balance. While these balances look similar, they have slightly different structures and behave differently.
We assume that small friction at the pivots allows the balance to eventually come to rest. However, this friction is sufficiently small that it does not affect the equilibrium angle determined from torque balance. Therefore, friction and air resistance may be neglected in the calculations.
A beam balance consists of a beam(lever arm) that rotates about a fixed axis(pivot or fulcrum) and two pans of equal mass suspended from each side of the beam. If the masses placed on the pans differ, the beam tilts toward the heavier side to reach equilibrium.
During the motion of the beam, the suspended pans may swing. Although the force exerted by the system consisting of the pan and the object on the beam may vary over time due to this swinging, we approximate the force as the total weight of the pan and the object, neglecting the swinging effect.
If the beam tilts at a large angle for even a small mass difference, the scale is considered sensitive. Part A of the question examines the issue of sensitivity.
The beam is assumed to be a flat sheet with negligible thickness. Let $O$ be the fixed point, and $L$ and $R$ be the points where the left and right pans are suspended, respectively. The center of mass of the beam coincides with point $O$ , as in fig.2. The axis of rotation passes through $O$ and is perpendicular to the beam. The physical parameters and variables that may be related to the beam balance and its sensitivity are as follows.
When $m_1 > m_2$, the beam tilts counter-clockwise by an angle $\theta_0$ to reach equilibrium.
To make the scale more sensitive (a larger $\theta_0$ for a small mass difference), which of the following conditions for $b$ and $l$ is correct? (Selecting an incorrect option will result in a 0.1-point deduction.)
The beam of a commercially available beam balance is often made so that the rotation axis (pivot point $O$) is higher than the center of mass (CM) of the beam. However, making the beam this way reduces the sensitivity of the beam balance. To solve this problem and design a more sensitive scale, we intend to change the structure of the beam. As a candidate, the beam is designed by modifying it so that the pivot point ($O$) of the beam is below the center of mass (CM) of the beam as shown in the fig. 3. Let the pivot point of the beam positioned at a distance $d$ underneath the center of mass. The beam is assumed to be a flat sheet with negligible thickness. The meanings of $M, L, R, b, l, m_1, m_2, g$ for the scale are the same as in the previous problem.
The Roberval balance uses a parallel-linkage structure, where the pans are connected to two horizontal beams (upper and lower). These two beams are joined to the pans by pivots, which act like hinges. This special connection allows each pan of two pivots to stay perfectly vertical even when the beams tilt (Fig.4). As the beams rotate, the pans move together in a synchronized way. A unique feature of this design is that the balance depends only on the total mass on each side; it does not matter where you place the weights on the pans. The physical parameters, variables and notations that may be related to the beam balance is as follows (Fig.5).
Assume that the Center of mass (CM) of each beam coincides with its pivot and that pivots of pans and pivot of the beam lays on one line.
The angular acceleration $\ddot{\theta}$ at the instant the beam is released from the horizontal position is as follows:
$$\ddot{\theta} = \frac{(m_L - m_R)gl}{I_1 + I_2 + (2m + m_L + m_R)l^2}$$
Set up all the necessary relational equations required to solve this problem. Note that you are only required to provide the forms of the equations; explicit final calculations are not necessary.
In the basic model of Roberval balance discussed in Part B, a mass imbalance causes continuous angular acceleration, making it impossible to determine a static equilibrium angle. In contrast, a practical Roberval balance reaches a stable equilibrium at a specific tilt angle depending on the mass difference. In Part C, we analyze the physical structure of such practical Roberval balances.
To calculate the equilibrium angle as a function of the mass difference, consider the following variables and parameters:
It is assumed that the weights remain stationary relative to the pans and move in unison with them and that pivots of pans and pivot of the beam lays on one line.
$A \ddot{\theta}=B\cos\theta+C\sin\theta$ .
Determine the coefficients $A,B$ and $C$ in terms of the given variables and parameters. Set $\theta = 0$ at the horizontal position.