Ball Up Incline: Total Energy & Height Q&A

  • Thread starter Thread starter mikefitz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ball Incline
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the total energy of a rolling sphere on an incline, specifically addressing the equations for kinetic energy (KE) and potential energy (PE). Total energy is confirmed as the sum of KE and PE, with KE defined as 1/2mv². The confusion regarding PE arises from a misstatement where PE was incorrectly represented as 1/1*Iw²; the correct expression for rotational kinetic energy is 1/2 Iω². The discussion clarifies that for a rolling sphere, total kinetic energy includes both translational and rotational components.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of classical mechanics principles, specifically energy conservation
  • Familiarity with the equations for kinetic energy (KE) and potential energy (PE)
  • Knowledge of rotational dynamics, including moment of inertia (I) and angular velocity (ω)
  • Basic grasp of rolling motion and its effects on energy calculations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the moment of inertia for various shapes, including spheres
  • Learn about the relationship between translational and rotational kinetic energy in rolling objects
  • Explore energy conservation principles in inclined planes and rolling motion
  • Investigate real-world applications of rolling motion in physics and engineering
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, educators teaching mechanics, and engineers involved in dynamics and energy calculations will benefit from this discussion.

mikefitz
Messages
155
Reaction score
0
http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/5524/untitledll1.png

what I'm looking for is 1. the total energy of the sphere, and 2. the height of the ball after it has traveled up the incline.

i have some questions however. First, i understand that total energy = KE+PE. looking at the solution, KE=1/2mv^2. why does PE=1/1*Iw^2? this is the first time I've ever seen PE defined as such an equation.

in the second part of the solution, they use mgh - why isn't mgh used in the first solution? thanks
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
mikefitz said:
i have some questions however. First, i understand that total energy = KE+PE. looking at the solution, KE=1/2mv^2. why does PE=1/1*Iw^2? this is the first time I've ever seen PE defined as such an equation.

The term 'PE=1/1*Iw^2' you were referring to was supposed to be the rotational kinetic energy of the sphere, which equals 1/2 I w^2, so I assume it was a mistype. You're right - total energy is defined as the sum of potential and kinetic energy - but, since you have a rolling sphere, the kinetic energy is the sum of rotational and translational kinetic energy.
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K