How Do You Calculate Angular Momentum for Different Pivot Points?

  • Thread starter Thread starter AriAstronomer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Angular
AI Thread Summary
To calculate angular momentum for a system with a particle and a meter stick, the correct approach depends on the pivot point. For a pivot at the 50.0-cm mark, using L = Iω yields the correct result, while using L = r x p can lead to errors if not applied correctly. The L = r x p method is suitable for point masses, but for extended objects, it requires integrating over mass elements. It's important to note that L = Iω is valid only for axes through the center of rotation or center of mass. For other pivot points, the formula must account for both the moment of inertia and the position of the center of mass.
AriAstronomer
Messages
46
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


A particle with a mass of 0.400 kg is attached to the
100-cm mark of a meter stick with a mass of 0.100 kg. The
meter stick rotates on a horizontal, frictionless table
with an angular speed of 4.00 rad/s. Calculate the angu-
lar momentum of the system when the stick is pivoted
about an axis (a) perpendicular to the table through
the 50.0-cm mark and (b) perpendicular to the table
through the 0-cm mark.



Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


I only need help with part a): Basically, I know I can get the right answer using L = Iw:
L = (I_rod + I_mass)w = (1/12ML^2 + MR^2)w = .433 = correct.
If however, I use the other definition L = rxp:
L = rxp_rod + rxp_mass = rMwr_rod + mwr^2 = 0.5 = incorrect. What am I missing? Seems like it's in the rod term. I guess r implies radius, and would work if it was a disk perhaps? Should I always go with the L = Iw definition if working with non radial objects?

Thanks,
Ari
 
Physics news on Phys.org
L = rxp is easy to use when the object associated with the momentum p is a point mass. When it's some extended shape then you have to break it down into mass elements (dm) each with its own bit of momentum (dp) over all of the object, and apply L = r x dp to all of them, summing as you go. Yes, it's an integral :wink:
 
Hi Ari! :smile:

(have an omega: ω and try using the X2 icon just above the Reply box :wink:)
AriAstronomer said:
If however, I use the other definition L = rxp:
L = rxp_rod + rxp_mass = rMwr_rod + mwr2 = 0.5 = incorrect. What am I missing? Seems like it's in the rod term. I guess r implies radius, and would work if it was a disk perhaps? Should I always go with the L = Iw definition if working with non radial objects?

Yes, you're right, it is the rod term. :smile:

L = r x p will always work for a point mass, but you need to use https://www.physicsforums.com/library.php?do=view_item&itemid=31" for anything else.

So you can use r x p for the mass in either case, and add it to the Iω for the rod, or you can use Iω for the rod-plus-mass.

btw, L = Iω only works for an axis through the centre of rotation (as in boht these cases) or the centre of mass …

for any other point, you need L = Ic.o.m.ω + r x mvc.o.m. :wink:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
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