Angular acceleration in terms of angular velocity

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between angular acceleration and angular velocity in the context of pendulum motion. Participants explore the derivation of angular frequency and the underlying principles of simple harmonic motion (SHM) as they relate to physical pendulums.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the origin of the relationship ##\alpha=\omega^2##, expressing confusion over its derivation in the context of pendulum problems.
  • Another participant suggests that the relationship may be a conversion factor for radial acceleration, linking it to the equation for radial acceleration and angular velocity.
  • A third participant provides a derivation of the angular frequency for a physical pendulum, referencing the torque equation and the small-angle approximation, but expresses uncertainty about the square root in the final expression for angular frequency.
  • A later reply indicates that the justification for the square root arises from comparing the derived equation to a known SHM equation, suggesting that a proof exists in earlier sections of the referenced material.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the derivation of the relationship between angular acceleration and angular velocity, and there are multiple competing views regarding the justification of the square root in the angular frequency expression.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in the provided derivations, including missing steps in the transition from torque to angular frequency and the dependence on small-angle approximations. There is also a lack of clarity on the assumptions made in the derivations.

Flipmeister
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
I've been working on problems that deal with pendulums and I've noticed that a few of my answers require me to find the angular velocity, frequency, period of a pendulum. I managed to get the answer right every time, but there's a step that I didn't understand, namely converting angular acceleration to angular velocity by what seems to be using this relationship:

[itex]\alpha=\omega^2[/itex]

Where in the heck does this come from? :confused: The book kind of skips this step in the examples and doesn't prove it at all, even though it proves just about every other equation it mentions.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That looks like a conversion factor for radial acceleration.

F=m * v2/r = m * a(rad)

so a(rad) is proportional to w2.

You'd need to show the example in detail for anyone to say more than that.
 
Here's how the book derives ##w=\sqrt{\frac{Mgl}{I}}##, the angular frequency of a physical pendulum:

[tex]\tau=-Mgd=Mglsin\theta[/tex]

If we restrict the angle to being small (<10 degrees), as we did for the simple pendulum, we can use the small-angle approximation to write

[tex]\tau=-Mgl\theta[/tex] (eq 14.49)

From Chapter 12, Newton's second law for rotational motion is ##\alpha=\frac{d^2\theta}{dt^2}=\frac{\tau}{I}## where I is the object's moment of inertia about the pivot point. Using eq. 14.49, we find

[tex]\frac{d^2\theta}{dt^2}=\frac{-Mgl}{I}\theta[/tex]

Comparison with eq. 14.32 (##\frac{d^2x}{dt^2}=-\frac{k}{m}x##) shows that this is again the SHM equation of motion, this time with angular frequency

[tex]\omega=2\pi f=\sqrt\frac{Mgl}{I}[/tex]

Something happens to get to that last step that doesn't add up for me... Why is Mgl/I square rooted?
 
It's justified here by comparison to an earlier expression for SHM Eq 14:32. In that section you will probably find a proof that f=1/2*pi sqrt(k/m)

There's a fair explanation in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simple_harmonic_motion

It's just that the solution of that differential equation is a cosine with √k/m (you can prove that to yourself by substituting it back)
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
7K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
20K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K