How Do Friction and Force Affect the Angular Velocity of Connected Wheels?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the dynamics of two connected wheels, one rotating and the other static, influenced by a constant force and friction. The participants explore the relationship between torque, angular velocity, and the effects of friction on the wheels' motion. Key points include the need to define the system accurately, the significance of the wheels' radii in calculating torque, and the implications of changing friction as the wheels reach the same velocity. The conversation emphasizes that the torques exerted by each wheel are equal and opposite, adhering to Newton's third law. Ultimately, the final angular velocity and the time taken for both wheels to synchronize their speeds are derived through integration of their respective equations of motion.
Jenny Physics
Messages
111
Reaction score
4

Homework Statement


A uniform cylindrical wheel of mass ##m_{1}## and radius ##R_{1}## rotates with angular velocity ##\omega_{1}##. It lies a certain distance (along the same axis) from a static wheel of radius ##R_{2}## and mass ##m_{2}##. The wheels are then pushed against each other with a constant force ##F## uniformly distributed across the wheel's face. There is friction between the wheels.
What is the final angular velocity of the two wheels ##\omega_{f}## and how long does it take for the wheels to reach that speed?
qrnsz6.png

Homework Equations


##\tau=I\ddot{\omega}##, maybe conservation laws?

The Attempt at a Solution



There is no conservation of angular momentum since the torque is changing.
The initial torque is ##\tau=\frac{2}{3}R_{1}F\mu##. I have to find ##I## for the cylinders. How do I relate ##\tau## at a given time with ##\omega##?
 

Attachments

  • qrnsz6.png
    qrnsz6.png
    1.7 KB · Views: 795
Physics news on Phys.org
Jenny Physics said:
There is no conservation of angular momentum since the torque is changing.
Angular momentum about a given axis is conserved for a system if there are no external forces that exert a torque about that axis.
What are you defining as the system? What external forces act on that system? Do they exert a torque about your chosen axis?

However, since you have to find the time taken, using a conservation law won't solve it. You have to consider the torque each disc exerts on the other.
Consider an annular element radius r, width dr, of the contact surfaces. What share of the normal force is exerted over that region. What torque does that imply?
 
  • Like
Likes Jenny Physics
haruspex said:
Angular momentum about a given axis is conserved for a system if there are no external forces that exert a torque about that axis.
What are you defining as the system? What external forces act on that system? Do they exert a torque about your chosen axis?

However, since you have to find the time taken, using a conservation law won't solve it. You have to consider the torque each disc exerts on the other.
Consider an annular element radius r, width dr, of the contact surfaces. What share of the normal force is exerted over that region. What torque does that imply?
The torque exerted by disk 1 on disk 2 is ##d\tau_{1}=r\frac{F}{\pi R_{1}^{2}}2\pi rdr \tau_{1}=\int_{0}^{R_{1}}=\frac{2}{3}R_{1}F## the torque exerted by disk 2 on disk 1 will then be ##\tau_{2}=\frac{2}{3}R_{2}F##. These are constant torques and that would lead to an angular momentum that varies linearly with ##t##?
 
Jenny Physics said:
The torque exerted by disk 1 on disk 2 is ##d\tau_{1}=r\frac{F}{\pi R_{1}^{2}}2\pi rdr ##, ##\tau_{1}=\int_{0}^{R_{1}}=\frac{2}{3}R_{1}F## the torque exerted by disk 2 on disk 1 will then be ##\tau_{2}=\frac{2}{3}R_{2}F##. These are constant torques and that would lead to an angular momentum that varies linearly with ##t##?
You left out the friction coefficient, and you need to think more about the significance of the radii maybe being different. can the torques they exert on each other be different?
Yes, the angular acceleration will be constant.
 
haruspex said:
You left out the friction coefficient, and you need to think more about the significance of the radii maybe being different. can the torques they exert on each other be different?
Yes, the angular acceleration will be constant.
If the angular acceleration is constant that means the angular velocity will decrease with time and there is no ##\omega_{f}##?
If I look at the torque on disk 2 due to disk 1 it is ##\tau_{21}=\frac{2}{3}F(R_{1}-R_{2}+\mu)##
 
Jenny Physics said:
If the angular acceleration is constant that means the angular velocity will decrease with time and there is no ##\omega_{f}##?
What happens to a kinetic friction force when the two surfaces reach the same velocity?
Jenny Physics said:
If I look at the torque on disk 2 due to disk 1 it is ##\tau_{21}=\frac{2}{3}F(R_{1}-R_{2}+\mu)##
How do you get that? It is not dimensionally consistent.
 
  • Like
Likes Jenny Physics
haruspex said:
What happens to a kinetic friction force when the two surfaces reach the same velocity?How do you get that? It is not dimensionally consistent.

The friction force becomes zero. But how do I model a changing friction force?
Typo. I meant ##\tau_{21}=\frac{2}{3}F(R_{1}-R_{2}+\mu R_{1})##
 
Last edited:
Jenny Physics said:
The friction force becomes zero. But how do I model a changing friction force?
Same way as for linear motion. The SUVAT equations map across to rotational motion quite simply.
Jenny Physics said:
Typo. I meant ##\tau_{21}=\frac{2}{3}F(R_{1}-R_{2}+\mu R_{1})##
Still wrong. If the coefficient is zero the torque will be zero.
If the radii are different, where does the friction occur?
 
  • Like
Likes Jenny Physics
haruspex said:
Same way as for linear motion. The SUVAT equations map across to rotational motion quite simply.

Still wrong. If the coefficient is zero the torque will be zero.
If the radii are different, where does the friction occur?

Not following. How do I model the jump from ##\mu## constant to a zero friction coefficient?
If the radii are different friction occurs on the circle of the smaller radius disk?
 
  • #10
Jenny Physics said:
If the radii are different friction occurs on the circle of the smaller radius disk?
Yes. So what equation do you get?
Jenny Physics said:
How do I model the jump from ##\mu## constant to a zero friction coefficient?
How do you find the time for a braking car to come to a stop?
But in this case, of course, it is relative motion that ceases.
 
  • Like
Likes Jenny Physics
  • #11
haruspex said:
Yes. So what equation do you get?
##\frac{2}{3}\mu FR_{1}## assuming ##R_{1}## is the smaller radius.

haruspex said:
How do you find the time for a braking car to come to a stop?
But in this case, of course, it is relative motion that ceases.
In this case I have to find the time at which the two wheels have the same angular velocity ##\omega_{f}##, so I assume I have to write two equations one for cylinder 1 and the other for cylinder 2 using ##\tau_{1}=I_{1}\dot{\omega}_{1},\tau_{2}=I_{2}\dot{\omega}_{2}##
 
  • #12
Jenny Physics said:
##\frac{2}{3}\mu FR_{1}## assuming ##R_{1}## is the smaller radius.In this case I have to find the time at which the two wheels have the same angular velocity ##\omega_{f}##, so I assume I have to write two equations one for cylinder 1 and the other for cylinder 2 using ##\tau_{1}=I_{1}\dot{\omega}_{1},\tau_{2}=I_{2}\dot{\omega}_{2}##
Yes, the relationship between the two torques being...?
 
  • Like
Likes Jenny Physics
  • #13
haruspex said:
Yes, the relationship between the two torques being...?
The two torques will be equal but opposite in sign i.e. ##\tau_{1}=-\tau_{2}##. So the equations of motion will be ##-\frac{2}{3}\mu FR_{1}=\frac{1}{2}mR_{1}^{2}\dot{\omega_{1}},\frac{2}{3}\mu FR_{1}=\frac{1}{2}mR_{2}^{2}\dot{\omega_{2}}## (notice how the moment of inertia are different because the radii are different)
 
  • #14
Jenny Physics said:
The two torques will be equal but opposite in sign i.e. ##\tau_{1}=-\tau_{2}##. So the equations of motion will be ##-\frac{2}{3}\mu FR_{1}=\frac{1}{2}mR_{1}^{2}\dot{\omega_{1}},\frac{2}{3}\mu FR_{1}=\frac{1}{2}mR_{2}^{2}\dot{\omega_{2}}## (notice how the moment of inertia are different because the radii are different)
Almost.
What is the final angular velocity of wheel 1?
 
  • Like
Likes Jenny Physics
  • #15
haruspex said:
Where ω1 is...?
##\omega_{1}## will be found by integration so should be ##\omega_{1}(t)=\omega_{1}(0)-\frac{4}{3mR_{1}}\mu F t## and ##\omega_{2}(t)=\frac{4}{3mR_{2}}\mu Ft##. Setting them equal gives the time ##t##
 
  • #16
Jenny Physics said:
##\omega_{1}## will be found by integration so should be ##\omega_{1}(t)=\omega_{1}(0)-\frac{4}{3mR_{1}}\mu F t## and ##\omega_{2}(t)=\frac{4}{3mR_{2}}\mu Ft##. Setting them equal gives the time ##t##
Not quite.
You made the assumption that R1 is smaller and in post #11 wrote the torque that applies to both. You need to avoid that assumption. I suggest you define R = min{R1, R2} and write the torque in terms of that.

Note that whichever is smaller, one of the expressions in post #15 is wrong.
 
  • Like
Likes Jenny Physics
  • #17
haruspex said:
Not quite.
You made the assumption that R1 is smaller and in post #11 wrote the torque that applies to both. You need to avoid that assumption. I suggest you define R = min{R1, R2} and write the torque in terms of that.

Note that whichever is smaller, one of the expressions in post #15 is wrong.
Ok assuming ##R_{1}## to be the smaller, ##\omega_{1}## will be found by integration so should be ##\omega_{1}(t)=\omega_{1}(0)-\frac{4}{3mR_{1}}\mu F t## and ##\omega_{2}(t)=\frac{4R_{1}}{3mR_{2}^{2}}\mu Ft##. Setting them equal gives the time ##t##
 
  • #18
Jenny Physics said:
Ok assuming ##R_{1}## to be the smaller, ##\omega_{1}## will be found by integration so should be ##\omega_{1}(t)=\omega_{1}(0)-\frac{4}{3mR_{1}}\mu F t## and ##\omega_{2}(t)=\frac{4R_{1}}{3mR_{2}^{2}}\mu Ft##. Setting them equal gives the time ##t##
Yes, but you cannot arbitrarily take R1 to be smaller because R1 is already defined as the one initially rotating at the given rate.
You can either provide two answers, one for each possibility, or use the expression ##\min\{R_1, R_2\}## in the answer.
 
  • Like
Likes Jenny Physics
  • #19
haruspex said:
Yes, but you cannot arbitrarily take R1 to be smaller because R1 is already defined as the one initially rotating at the given rate.
You can either provide two answers, one for each possibility, or use the expression ##\min\{R_1, R_2\}## in the answer.

I agree. I have one lingering question which is why can we cancel the torques due to F on a given wheel? I agree that when ##R_{1}=R_{2}## the torques are equal in magnitude and opposite, but since the torque is an integral of ##d\tau=r\frac{F}{\pi R^{2}}2\pi r dr## will this not imply that the torque of the larger cylinder is larger than the torque of the smaller cylinder?
 
  • #20
Jenny Physics said:
I agree. I have one lingering question which is why can we cancel the torques due to F on a given wheel? I agree that when ##R_{1}=R_{2}## the torques are equal in magnitude and opposite, but since the torque is an integral of ##d\tau=r\frac{F}{\pi R^{2}}2\pi r dr## will this not imply that the torque of the larger cylinder is larger than the torque of the smaller cylinder?
The integral is over the area of contact, which is the same for both. There is no torque on the part of the larger wheel that sticks out.
The torques must be equal and opposite - It's Newton's law of action and reaction.
 
  • Like
Likes Jenny Physics
Back
Top