Calculating Coriolis and Centrifugal Forces in a Rotating Frame

In summary, the picture shows a disk rotating and a man standing on it. The man sees the disk rotating and the centrifugal and coriolis forces acting on him.
  • #1
PhMichael
134
0
http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/9222/85615861.jpg [Broken]

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Homework Statement


The picture speaks for itself: one man "A" is standing of a rotating disk whose angular velocity is [tex] \omega [/tex] CCW, and another one "B" is standing still on earth. I'm riquired to find the coriolis and centrifugal forces that act on "B" as seen from "A".

The Attempt at a Solution



Coriolis:

[tex] \vec{F}_{cor} = -2m \vec{\omega} \times \vec{v}_{rel} [/tex]

Centrifugal:

[tex] \vec{F}_{cen} = -m \vec{\omega} \times (\vec{\omega} \times \vec{r}) [/tex]

where,

the angular velocity should be taken in the CW sense, since "A" sees "B" doing circles in that direction, so:

[tex] \vec{\omega}=-\omega \hat{z} [/tex]

about the relative velocity of "B" with respect to "A" I'm not quite sure because the coriolis force appears only when there's movement in a rotating frame, now "A" clearly doesn't move, but the question is: can it see "B" moving in the following velocity:

[tex] \vec{v}_{rel} = \omega r \hat{\theta} [/tex]

??

and the radius vector is:

[tex] \vec{r} = R \hat{r} [/tex]

any clarification would be appreciated =)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Earlier you stated that "A sees B doing circles", so there is relative motion, correct? Then if there is relative motion, then why isn't there relative velocity? :wink:
By the way, if you arrive at the correct centrifugal force and Coriolis force, adding them together, you will see something very intuitive.
 
  • #3
wow, thanks a lot ... in two words you've just cleared some stuff that I've been breaking my head over for the last couple of hours :D

and yeah, adding them both would yield the centripetal force that is applied on bodies in circular motions, isn't it?
 
  • #4
Yep :wink:
 
  • #5
one more thing that i want to verify about the relative velocity calculation ... All I did to obtain this is to differentiate the position vector with respect to time so that:

[tex] \frac{d \vec{r}}{dt}=R \frac{d \hat{r}}{dt} = R \omega \hat{\theta} [/tex]

First of all, is true to get it that way (in all circumstances) ?

Is there another "physical", rather that mathematical, way to obtain this result? because frankly I can't imagine the picture that would lead me to this consequence of the realtive velocity.
 
  • #6
When you differentiate the position vector or any vector w.r.t. time, you must state which reference frame you are considering.
_ In the reference frame of the ground or B, [tex]\vec{r}_B=const[/tex]. It doesn't change at all. So differentiate it w.r.t. time, you get zero, which is intuitive. But you will see that in this reference frame, A is moving, so [tex]d\vec{r}_A/dt\neq 0[/tex].
_ In the reference frame of the disk or A, you will A stays at rest, while B is moving in the opposite direction of the circular motion of A. So in this reference frame, [tex]\vec{r}_A=const[/tex] and [tex]d\vec{r}_B/dt\neq 0[/tex].
The motions of A and B can be described via the two coordinate systems sticking to A and B. For A, it's the red one, and for B, it's the blue one. The blue one sees the red one rotating (which corresponds to B's viewpoint), and reversely, the red one sees the blue one rotating in the opposite direction (A's viewpoint).
 

Attachments

  • untitled.JPG
    untitled.JPG
    22 KB · Views: 336
  • #7
But then a problem of choosing the right sign for the angular velocity is raised...

because:

[tex] \frac{d \hat{r}}{dt} = \vec{\omega} \times \hat{r} [/tex]

so according to A, the angular velocity would be [tex]\vec{\omega}=-\omega \hat{z} [/tex] (the one which we substitute in the relative velocity equation), which has to be wrong because it won't give the final correct answer of the velocity ... In other words, which [tex]\vec{\omega}[/tex] need I choose and why?
 
Last edited:
  • #8
Did you notice that I put a minus sign before [tex]\omega[/tex] in the picture? :wink: The rotations in the 2 frames obviously are in opposite directions.

EDIT: I didn't see your correction when posting. Your problem is that you use the notation [tex]\vec{\omega}[/tex] interchangeably between the 2 frames. If [tex]\vec{\omega}[/tex] is the angular velocity of A in the ground's frame, then the angular velocity of B in A's frame fortunately is [tex]\vec{\omega}_B=-\vec{\omega}[/tex]. Therefore, in A's frame:
[tex]\vec{v}_{rel}=d\vec{r}/dt = \vec{\omega}_B\times \vec{r}=-\vec{\omega}\times\vec{r}[/tex]
 
Last edited:
  • #9
nono, I understand your picture ... what I mean is that the angular velocity that I used in the calculation of the relative velocity is [tex] \vec{\omega}=\omega \hat{z} [/tex] , however, for the expressions of the coriolis and centrifugal forces I used the opposite one, [tex] \vec{\omega} = -\omega \hat{z} [/tex] and it seemed correct because it produced the correct answer ... but, now, I'm not quite sure why different sign omegas are used, as one equation yields the other ... can u please clear for me this difference?
 
  • #10
Okay. Let's make it clear:
_ The angular velocity of A in the ground's frame: [tex]\vec{\omega}_A=\vec{\omega}[/tex]
_ The angular velocity of B in A's frame: [tex]\vec{\omega}_B=-\vec{\omega}[/tex]
_ Relative velocity of B in A's frame: [tex]\vec{v}_{rel}=\vec{\omega}_B\times\vec{r}=-\vec{\omega}\times\vec{r}[/tex]
We have:
[tex]\vec{F}_{coriolis}=-2m\vec{\omega}_A\times\vec{v}_{rel}=2m\vec{\omega}\times(\vec{\omega}\times\vec{r})[/tex]
[tex]\vec{F}_{centrifugal}=-m\vec{\omega}_A\times(\vec{\omega}_A\times\vec{r})=-m\vec{\omega}\times(\vec{\omega}\times\vec{r})[/tex]
The total force on B in A's frame:
[tex]\vec{F}=\vec{F}_{coriolis}+\vec{F}_{centrifugal}=m\vec{\omega}\times(\vec{\omega}\times\vec{r})=-m\omega^2\vec{r}[/tex] which corresponds to the centripetal force.
 
  • #11
Thanks pal! :wink:
 

1. What is the Coriolis force?

The Coriolis force is an apparent force that results from the Earth's rotation. It causes objects moving across the Earth's surface to appear to curve to the right in the Northern Hemisphere and to the left in the Southern Hemisphere.

2. How does the Coriolis force affect weather patterns?

The Coriolis force plays a major role in the formation of weather patterns. It influences the direction and speed of winds, the rotation of storms and hurricanes, and the movement of ocean currents.

3. What is the difference between Coriolis force and centrifugal force?

Coriolis force and centrifugal force are often confused, but they are two different concepts. Coriolis force is an apparent force resulting from the Earth's rotation, while centrifugal force is a real force that pushes objects away from the center of rotation.

4. How do Coriolis and centrifugal forces impact the trajectory of a projectile?

Both Coriolis and centrifugal forces can affect the trajectory of a projectile, but in different ways. The Coriolis force will cause the projectile to appear to curve to the right or left, while the centrifugal force will cause it to deviate from a straight path and follow a curved path.

5. Can Coriolis and centrifugal forces be felt or measured on the Earth's surface?

Coriolis and centrifugal forces are not directly felt or measured on the Earth's surface. They are only apparent forces that result from the Earth's rotation and can only be observed through the motion of objects or phenomena.

Similar threads

  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
670
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
17
Views
309
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
636
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
12
Views
60
Replies
20
Views
813
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
164
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
756
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
25
Views
211
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
819
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
136
Back
Top