How Is This Torque Equation Derived?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Thales
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Torque
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation of a specific torque equation for a rigid body, which relates torque, angular momentum, and the inertia tensor in the context of rigid body dynamics. Participants explore the implications of noninertial reference frames and rotating coordinate systems, as well as the mathematical formulation of these concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant shares a torque equation from a book and expresses a desire for its derivation, indicating a lack of understanding of its meaning.
  • Another participant suggests that the derivation may involve motion in noninertial reference frames and mentions a similar equation found in their dynamics text, which could provide insight.
  • A third participant offers to share a proof from their lecture notes, although they describe it as long and boring, indicating it may not be crucial to the discussion.
  • Further contributions include a link to an external resource on torque and a mathematical statement regarding the time change of body-fixed unit coordinate vectors in relation to angular velocity.
  • One participant provides a mathematical expression for the absolute time derivative of a vector in body coordinates, linking it to the relative time derivative and angular velocity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the derivation of the torque equation. Multiple viewpoints and approaches are presented, with some participants suggesting connections to noninertial frames and others providing mathematical formulations without resolving the overall question.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes various assumptions about the nature of the reference frames and the mathematical treatment of the torque equation, which remain unresolved. The participants' contributions reflect differing levels of familiarity with the underlying concepts and mathematical tools.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and professionals in physics and engineering, particularly those studying rigid body dynamics and the mathematical frameworks involved in torque and angular momentum.

Thales
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
I have this book, which provides the following torque equation for a rigid body:

[tex]\sum\tau_{cg} = \frac{dL_{cg}}{dt} = I\frac{d\omega}{dt} + (\omega \times (I\omega))[/tex]

Where [tex]L_{cg}[/tex] is the angular momentum around the CG. The moments, inertia tensor, and angular velocity are all expressed in local (body) coordinates.

This is all fine and dandy, but what is not provided is a derivation. I'm wondering if anyone knows its derivation, because I don't fully understand its meaning. :rolleyes:

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I believe the answer has something to do with the fact you are dealing with motion in a noninertial reference frame. You may be dealing with "fixed" axes and "rotating" axes. The derivation may lie in the section pertaining to rotating coordinate systems under the noninertial reference frames chapter. For example, in my dynamics text I found a derivation for an equation matching the one you show, except that it was generalized for an arbitrary vector. In other words, just replace your vector Lcg and I(omega), which are equivalent, with a general vector and you get the equation in my book. This equation was later used with torque when dealing with Euler's equations for a rigid body. Hope this helps.

BTW I would have given you the equation in my book directly, however, I do not yet know how to input formulas in this forum yet!
 
I know it, but it's long and boring. Beleive me, you're not missing anything crucial. If you want the proof I have it complete in my lecture notes. They are not in English, but I think you would have no problem understanding the proof. If you are interesting I can email you the doc.
 
Thanks to both of you for the feedback.

quarkman, if you want to learn about using latex, check out:

Latex


tomkeus, even if it's boring, I'd love to see it. :biggrin:

I'm not sure if this forum provides an email attachment capability... But you can send it to jwalway@hotmail.com

Thanks again!
 
I have sent it.
 
Given a set of body-fixed unit coordinate vectors
[tex]\vec{i}_{x,b},\vec{i}_{y,b},\vec{i}_{z,b}[/tex]
for a body that rotates absolutely with [tex]\vec{\omega}[/tex],
the time change of these absolutely is given by:
[tex]\frac{d\vec{i}_{x,b}}{dt}_{abs}=\vec{\omega}\times\vec{i}_{x,b}[/tex]
and similarly for the two others.
(Clearly, this is a statement, not a proof, but ought to be obvious)

Let a vector be given in body coordinates:
[tex]\vec{L}=L_{x}\vec{i}_{x,b}+L_{y}\vec{i}_{y,b}+L_{z}\vec{i}_{z,b}[/tex]
Hence, the absolute time derivative is given by:
[tex]\frac{d\vec{L}}{dt}_{abs}=\frac{d\vec{L}}{dt}_{rel}+\vec{\omega}\times\vec{L}[/tex]
Here, we have the relative time derivative (i.e, in which the axes is considered fixed):
[tex]\frac{d\vec{L}}{dt}_{rel}=\frac{dL_{x}}{dt}\vec{i}_{x,b}+\frac{dL_{y}}{dt}\vec{i}_{y,b}+\frac{dL_{z}}{dt}\vec{i}_{z,b}[/tex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K