Moment of Inertia of Cavendish pendulum

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion focuses on calculating the moment of inertia for the Cavendish pendulum, exploring the appropriate formulas and considerations for a pendulum where weights are suspended rather than attached to a bar. Participants are examining the implications of different configurations and the contributions of various components to the overall moment of inertia.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes using the formula I = 2(m r^2) for the moment of inertia but questions its applicability to the suspended weights of the Cavendish pendulum.
  • Another participant requests a diagram to clarify the geometry of the pendulum setup, indicating the need for visual representation to understand differences from standard configurations.
  • A participant references Cavendish's original paper and suggests that the weight of the bar and supporting wire should be considered in the calculations.
  • One participant asserts that the moment of inertia remains the same as in a dumbbell configuration due to the two masses revolving around a common central point, while also noting the need to calculate the inertia of the suspension mechanism.
  • Another participant provides a formula for the moment of inertia of a rod rotating around its midpoint and suggests combining this with the previously calculated inertia for the weights.
  • A participant shares their calculations for the total moment of inertia, incorporating the weights of the balls and the rod, and seeks validation for their results.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the appropriate formulas and considerations for the moment of inertia of the Cavendish pendulum. There is no consensus on a single formula or approach, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the best method to calculate the moment of inertia.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the importance of considering various components, such as the weights of the bar and supporting wires, in the calculations. There are also references to specific geometrical configurations that may affect the moment of inertia, but these aspects remain under discussion.

Pioneer1
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I am trying to compute the moment of inertia of the Cavendish pendulum. I used

I = 2(m r^2)

r = gyration arm
m = the weight attached to the pendulum

But this formula is for a dumbell type of torsion pendulum where the weights are attached to the bar.

Does anyone know the formula for a pendulum where the weights are suspended as in the case of the Cavendish pendulum? I couldn't find it online.

With this formula I got

I = 2 ( 729.8 * 93.1^2) = 12,651,243.56 g cm^2

Does this sound right for a pendulum of this dimensions?

Thanks for your help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Pioneer1 said:
Does anyone know the formula for a pendulum where the weights are suspended as in the case of the Cavendish pendulum?

For the benefit of those of us who haven't been following your previous discussions closely, can you provide a diagram of the specific geometry that you have in mind, so we can see how it differs from Example 1 in the link you provided (which is the case where [itex]I = 2mr^2[/itex])?
 
jtbell said:
For the benefit of those of us who haven't been following your previous discussions closely, can you provide a diagram of the specific geometry that you have in mind, so we can see how it differs from Example 1 in the link you provided (which is the case where [itex]I = 2mr^2[/itex])?

Thanks for your reply. Here's the drawing from Cavendish's original paper:

http://www.alphysics.com/cavendishexperiment/CavendishSchematic11.jpg

And here's a detail

http://www.alphysics.com/cavendishexperiment/CavendishSchematic111.jpg

Cavendish also gave the weight of the bar and the silver wire he used to strengthen it. I assume those will have to be taken into consideration as well.
 
You've still got two masses revolving around a common central point, so their moment of inertia I is the same as when they're connected by a rod of negligible mass in a dumbbell configuration as in the page you first referenced. So you're OK so far.

What you need now is I for the rotating part of the suspension mechanism. You have the mass of the transverse rod, and I for a rod rotating transversely around its midpoint is a standard case. For some reason it's not on the page you first referenced, but you can find it on Hyperphysics:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mi.html#cmi

Just add the two I's together. In principle, you should also consider I for the rest of the rotating part of the apparatus, but the supporting wires are probably pretty light so you can safely neglect them, at least as a start in your analysis.
 
jtbell said:
Just add the two I's together. In principle, you should also consider I for the rest of the rotating part of the apparatus, but the supporting wires are probably pretty light so you can safely neglect them, at least as a start in your analysis.

Ok. Thanks. From hyperphysics I got 1/12 M L^2 and added it to the previous result:

I = 2 m r^2 + 1/12 M L^2

L = length of the rod
r = half length of the rod

So,

Total moment of inertia for the Cavendish experiment = r^2 (2m + 1/3M) = 13,137,851.84 cm2 g

m = weight of each ball = 729.8 g

M = Rod weight = 155.5 + 11 + 2.9 = 169.40 g (including deal rod, silver supporting wire, vernier attached to the arm)

L = Rod length = 73.3 inches = 186.18 cm

r = Half rod length = 93.09 cm

I also added another picture with a little more detail about the arm. (Figure 3 here.)

Does this look good?

Thanks again for your help.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 76 ·
3
Replies
76
Views
8K
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K