Acceleration of system related to rolling motion and pulley

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the dynamics of a frictionless system involving a sphere and a pulley, questioning whether the sphere can roll without slipping under these conditions. It highlights the complexities of calculating the accelerations of both the sphere and the hanging mass, noting that the tension in the rope differs for each object due to the pulley’s mass. Participants express confusion about the term "acceleration of the system," debating whether it refers to the center of mass of the sphere or the hanging mass. The necessity of friction for rolling without slipping is emphasized, suggesting that static friction is essential for the sphere's motion. Overall, the conversation reveals the challenges in analyzing the system's mechanics without clear definitions and parameters.
  • #31
Please forgive me for going off-topic but the image in @Lnewqban ’s Post #29
https://www.physicsforums.com/attachments/manlift-jpg.305490/
immediately reminded me of an (IMO funny) Irish folk song.

For anyone so inclined - and having three minutes to spare - here it is (with lyrics).
Edit: The only song I know about Atwood machines!

Otherwise, please ignore.
 

Attachments

Last edited:
  • Like
Likes songoku
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Thank you, @kuruman.
I would pick items 1 and 3, because those are the only ones having linear accelerations (here assuming that that is the type of acceleration requested to be calculated by the problem).

Item 5 must be considered as well because it determines the fraction of the weight of item 1 that is resisting the weight of item 3 (driving force in the system), or tension in item 4.

The rotational inertia of items 1 and 2 also resist the effect of the driving force; therefore, both need to be considered.
 
  • #33
Lnewqban said:
Thank you, @kuruman.
I would pick items 1 and 3, because those are the only ones having linear accelerations (here assuming that that is the type of acceleration requested to be calculated by the problem).

Item 5 must be considered as well because it determines the fraction of the weight of item 1 that is resisting the weight of item 3 (driving force in the system), or tension in item 4.

The rotational inertia of items 1 and 2 also resist the effect of the driving force; therefore, both need to be considered.
You originally proposed taking the vector sum of the two accelerations, which is bizarre.

In post #23, you mention COM, so you might be proposing the acceleration of the mass centre of the system consisting of the two linearly moving masses. If so, @kuruman already offered that in post #17, and I agreed that was defensible.
But I could also interpret your post as meaning the weighted average of the magnitudes of the two linear accelerations, which also has some validity. That interpretation seems to be supported by posts #29 and #32.

But the whole discussion is fruitless. The question does not define "the system" (why exclude the massive pulley?), it does not mention magnitudes and does not mention COM. If we're playing guess the question setter's intent, it is clear s/he overlooked the ambiguity, so may well have just been thinking of the descending mass.

@songoku has solved the problem as far as is possible.
 
  • Like
Likes erobz
  • #34
haruspex said:
You originally proposed taking the vector sum of the two accelerations, which is bizarre.
Would you mind explaining why do you believe so?
 
  • #35
Lnewqban said:
Would you mind explaining why do you believe so?
Because it has no physical meaning, as illustrated by my example in post #16.
 
  • Like
Likes SammyS
  • #36
Thank you very much for all the help and explanation Lnewqban, erobz, kuruman, haruspex, Steve4Physics, jbriggs444, malawi_glenn
 
  • Like
Likes erobz and Lnewqban

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 97 ·
4
Replies
97
Views
6K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
3K
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 60 ·
3
Replies
60
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K