|
|
Forums:
Climbing Information:
The Lab:
Re: [jt512] Spring constant of a rope:
Edit Log
|
|
armsrforclimbing
Oct 7, 2008, 8:52 PM
Views: 2642
Registered: Feb 11, 2004
Posts: 214
|
It's late, I'm fresh off the debates and a glass or two of wine, so bear with me.
The equation of a line is y=mx+b set b=0 and the line passes through the origin, you also end up with the equation y=mx (similar to that of the Hooke's Law without direction of force) Hooke's law describes the linear relationship of force and deformation in an idealized spring. So in concept, the slope of the line obtained from plotting force on the Y axis and the resulting deformation on the X axis results in k's (read: slope) units of force/unit length.
"k" is referred to as the spring constant, if it were a force value, as used in rgolds paper, it would by nature of a slope (change in y/change in x) be required to change and cannot be constant. This is the Hooke's law I am familiar with. The "k" value derived in the paper does not represent a physical constant unique to a particular spring, rather a variable force, and will not work with other equations when used as such.
(This post was edited by armsrforclimbing on Oct 7, 2008, 9:24 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
