Speed of objects rolling down slopes

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter iluvc
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Rolling Speed
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the physics of objects rolling down slopes, specifically addressing the impact of mass and rotational inertia on speed. It is established that solid balls of varying sizes and masses will reach the bottom of a slope simultaneously due to the conservation of energy principle, which indicates that velocity depends solely on height and the ratio of moment of inertia to mass times radius squared (J/mr²). The confusion arises regarding the rotational inertia of larger solid balls, but it is clarified that for objects of the same shape, this ratio remains constant, leading to identical speeds regardless of size.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of conservation of energy principles in physics
  • Familiarity with rotational inertia and its calculation
  • Knowledge of the moment of inertia and its dependence on shape
  • Basic concepts of kinematics and dynamics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the conservation of energy equation for rolling objects
  • Explore the concept of moment of inertia in detail, particularly for different shapes
  • Investigate the effects of shape and mass distribution on rolling motion
  • Learn about the dynamics of rolling ellipsoids and their unique properties
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, educators teaching mechanics, and anyone interested in understanding the dynamics of rolling motion and energy conservation principles.

iluvc
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I'm a bit confused about the speed of objects rolling down slopes.

In my textbook, it says
"Neither the mass nor the size of the object will affect its speed when rolling downhill." And that solid balls of different masses/sizes will all reach the bottom of the slope together.

And then it goes on to say that because a hollow cylinder has mass far from the centre, it has a large rotational intertia, so gains a larger proportion of rotational Ek, so a smaller proportion of linear Ek, so it will have a slower speed when rolling downhill. Hence a solid ball (smaller I) will reach the bottom of the slope before the hollow cylinder.

My ques is - if rotational inertia is what determines the speed of objects rolling down slopes, won't a larger solid ball have a larger rotational inertia than a smaller solid ball? So a larger solid ball should (by the reasoning above) have a slower speed, so will reach the bottom of the slope AFTER (not at the same time as) a smaller solid ball?

Yet my textbook says "Large or small, light or heavy, all of these solid balls will reach the bottom of the slope together".

Can someone help me clear up my confusion?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Let's just do the equation and see what we get
Conservation of energy states
\frac12 J\omega^2+\frac12 mv^2+mgh=\text{const}
where the energies are rotational energy, kinetic linear energy and potential energy. J is the moment of inertia around the rolling axis. With v=\omega r this simplifies to
\frac12\left(\frac{J}{mr^2}+1\right)v^2+gh=\text{const}
So the velocity only depends on height and \frac{J}{mr^2}. For bodies with the same shape this expression is the same.
 
Thanks Gerenuk!

But do you mind explaining this:

Gerenuk said:
So the velocity only depends on height and \frac{J}{mr^2}. For bodies with the same shape this expression is the same.

Why's it the same for bodies of the same shape?
 
iluvc said:
Why's it the same for bodies of the same shape?
That's actually not quite a general statement.
At least for object with some degree of symmetry (maybe cylindrical; like spheres or cylinders) it turns out that
J=amr^2 where a is a constant (consider a scaling argument for J=\int r^2\mathrm{d}m). This case is easy.
Basically if an object with cylindrical symmetry (and constant radius) is scaled up or its mass density is changed, the expression J/(mr^2) is invariant.

I'm not sure how much one can generalize this statement.

For rolling ellipsoids one actually has to check all preconditions again. I think all equations are valid again, however r would be the distance from ground to the center of mass which changes as the ellipsoid rotates and also the velocity in v=\omega r is not the velocity of the center of mass projected along the inclination of the ground. And I guess J=amr_\text{avg}^2. So I could image that this equal shape theorem doesn't apply for ellipsoids, but I haven't checked all details.

Maybe someone else can clarify which class of objects reaches the end of the track at the same time.
I wouldn't be surprised if someone is able to prove that a general upscaling of the physical situation gives same time for rolling. But that would also mean that for comparing rolling at one type of slope only, on needs a self-similar slope, i.e. a flat slope.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
10K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
6K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K