Acceleration of a falling tower

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the radial and tangential acceleration of a falling cylindrical chimney modeled as a thin rod. The radial acceleration at a 35-degree angle from the vertical is calculated to be 5.32 m/s², while the tangential acceleration is initially miscalculated as 8.23 m/s², with the book stating it should be 8.43 m/s². The user explores the relationship between the center of mass and the end of the rod, questioning the assumption that the end falls at gravitational acceleration. They seek clarification on how to derive the correct tangential acceleration without using torque, as suggested by the problem's hint. The conversation emphasizes the complexities of rotational dynamics in this scenario.
TimH
Messages
56
Reaction score
0
This is problem 67 in Chapter 10 of Halliday/Resnick/Walker 8th Edition. This is one of their three star (= hard) problems. I can get the beginning but then get stuck.

A cylindrical chimney of height L=55m falls over. Treat it as a thin rod. Get the radial acceleration and tangential acceleration of the top when it makes an angle of 35 degrees with the vertical. Then find the angle where the tangential acceleration will equal g (= the acceleration of gravity).

Okay, I can get the radial acceleration. Here's the workings: Using the parallel-axis theorem, the rotational inertia of the rod is I=(1/12) m L + m (L/2)^2=(1/3) m L^2 (with m=mass of rod). The first term is the I of the rod around its center of mass (com), which is at L/2, and the second term is the mass of the rod times the distance^2 between the com and the base of the rod.

The com of the rod (at L/2) starts with a potential energy of U= m g (L/2). When it is leaning at an angle of 35 degrees from the vertical, the height of the com is now (L/2) cos(35)=22.52m. So the change in U is m g ( L/2) (1-cos(35)). This change equals the kinetic energy which is K=(1/2) I w^2 where w=the angular velocity. But we know I is (1/3) m L^2. Plugging this in and solving for w gives w=SQR( 3 g (1-cos(35))/L)= .311 rad/s.

The velocity of the end of the rod is v=w L=17.1m/s. The radial acceleration is ar=v^2/L=5.32m/s^2. This is the answer in the book.

Now, for the tangential acceleration, where I'm stuck. At first I figured that the vector sum of the radial acceleration (ar) and the tangential acceleration (at) should equal the acceleration of gravity, since the tower is falling. So this would be g^2=ar^2+at^2, and solving for (at) gives at=8.23m/s^2. But the book says 8.43m/s^2. I've done it using all the significant figures in the calculator and I don't think its a rounding problem. So then I started wondering why I thought the end of the rod should fall at g. Maybe the center of mass (com) at L/2 should fall at g, and the end of the rod is being "whipped" to a higher acceleration. I tried g^2=ar^2+at^2 for the midpoint, which is easy since w is the same. This give ar(com)=2.658m/s^2 and at(com)=9.43m/s^2. I thought there would be a proportion between this and the (at) at the distance L, and the change in distance, but this doesn't seem to work either.

Any guidance much appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I got 8.43 m/s2 by calculating the torque at the base caused by mg at the center of mass at 35o, then use the moment of inertia to get the acceleration at the top.
 
Clever! I like it. The problem says as a hint not to use torque, which is why I went the way I did. Is there a way to get the answer with my approach? What I mean is, from ar, without using torque?
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Trying to understand the logic behind adding vectors with an angle between them'
My initial calculation was to subtract V1 from V2 to show that from the perspective of the second aircraft the first one is -300km/h. So i checked with ChatGPT and it said I cant just subtract them because I have an angle between them. So I dont understand the reasoning of it. Like why should a velocity be dependent on an angle? I was thinking about how it would look like if the planes where parallel to each other, and then how it look like if one is turning away and I dont see it. Since...
Back
Top