Acceleration in a rotating frame

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of acceleration in a rotating frame, specifically addressing the derivation of forces such as Coriolis and centrifugal forces. Participants are examining the relationship between net forces and external forces in the context of Newton's second law as applied to rotating frames.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a derivation involving the acceleration in a rotating frame and expresses confusion about the final expression for net force.
  • Another participant questions the definition of external forces in this context, seeking clarification on the role of \vec{F}_{ext}.
  • A participant attempts to clarify that the net force should be the sum of all external forces, noting that Coriolis and centrifugal forces are inertial forces and not external.
  • There is a concern about the signs of the forces involved in the equations, indicating potential confusion regarding their interpretation.
  • One participant highlights a discrepancy between the derived expressions for net force and external force, suggesting that the definitions may not align as expected.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the definitions and roles of external versus inertial forces in the context of the equations presented. The discussion remains unresolved, with no consensus on the interpretation of the forces involved.

Contextual Notes

Participants are grappling with the implications of the signs in the equations and the definitions of forces in a rotating frame, which may depend on specific assumptions or interpretations not fully articulated in the discussion.

Nylex
Messages
552
Reaction score
2
I'm getting confused by this. I have a handout from a lecture that has a derivation that ends with

"[tex]\vec{a} = \vec{a'} + 2\vec{\omega} \times \vec{v'} + \vec{\omega} \times (\vec{\omega} \times \vec{r})[/tex]

Multiplying through by mass, m

[tex]m\vec{a} = \vec{F_{ext}} = m\vec{a'} + 2m\vec{\omega} \times \vec{v'} + m\vec{\omega} \times (\vec{\omega} \times \vec{r})[/tex]

We preserve Newton II in rotating frame by writing [tex]\vec{F'_{net}} = m\vec{a'}[/tex] where [tex]\vec{F'_{net}}[/tex] is the net force measured by observer in rotating frame.

ie. [tex]\vec{F'_{net}} = \vec{F_{ext}} - 2m(\vec{\omega} \times \vec{v'}) - m[\vec{\omega} \times (\vec{\omega} \times \vec{r})][/tex]"

It's really the last line that's confusing me. The expressions for the Coriolis and centrifugal forces are

[tex]\vec{F_{Cor}} = -2m(\vec{\omega} \times \vec{v'})[/tex] and [tex]\vec{F_{cent}} = -m\vec{\omega} \times (\vec{\omega} \times \vec{r})[/tex], so why isn't it

[tex]\vec{F'_{net}} - \vec{F_{Cor}} - \vec{F_{cent}} = \vec{F_{ext}}[/tex]?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hold on a second,who's [itex]\vec{F}_{ext}[/itex]...?

Daniel.
 
"Sum of real forces (electrical, magnetic, gravitational, etc); only these forces are observed in stationary frame".

All I'm getting confused about is the signs of those forces.
 
Why shouldn't the NET force be the sum of all external forces...?Afer all,both Coriolis & centrifugal are inertial forces,they're not external forces.

Daniel.
 
Grr, I know that, but:

[tex]m\vec{a} = \vec{F_{ext}} = m\vec{a'} + 2m\vec{\omega} \times \vec{v'} + m\vec{\omega} \times (\vec{\omega} \times \vec{r})[/tex]

ie. [tex]\vec{F'_{net}} = \vec{F_{ext}} - 2m(\vec{\omega} \times \vec{v'}) - m[\vec{\omega} \times (\vec{\omega} \times \vec{r})][/tex]"

The first and second lines aren't the same. If [tex]\vec{F'_{net}} = m\vec{a'}[/tex], then the first line is [tex]m\vec{a} = \vec{F_{ext}} = \vec{F'_{net}} - \vec{F_{Cor}} - \vec{F_{cent}}[/tex] :confused:.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K